Pregnant women are being turned away from anti-abortion state ERs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird there are people who think medical pregnancy complications can be solved with relationship counseling. Any woman who gets pregnant can have emergency medical needs.

That's wild people who want to get pregnant/ are pregnant in Idaho may need to purchase emergency air transport insurance so they aren't bankrupted if they have a medical emergency.

Oral arguments in Idaho’s desperate attempt to kill women in the name of “life” took place this morning.

I wonder how many women have died.

I wonder why forced birthers think so little of women that they’re okay with emergency care being portioned out to the lucky few in dollops like this.

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird there are people who think medical pregnancy complications can be solved with relationship counseling. Any woman who gets pregnant can have emergency medical needs.

That's wild people who want to get pregnant/ are pregnant in Idaho may need to purchase emergency air transport insurance so they aren't bankrupted if they have a medical emergency.

Oral arguments in Idaho’s desperate attempt to kill women in the name of “life” took place this morning.

I wonder how many women have died.

I wonder why forced birthers think so little of women that they’re okay with emergency care being portioned out to the lucky few in dollops like this.

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

[Anonymous]

Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

Probably because we’re all still reeling that the GOP is giddily trying to kill women.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/04/23/trump-losing-courtroom-campaign-bragg-trial/

The way half-way forced birthers comfort themselves about the draconian politicians they support is by telling themselves the lie that women’s lives will be spared. Not only will women’s lives not be spared, prosecutions will be on a case by case basis, and will be entirely random, at least from the perspective of the doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

It’s appalling. Alito reaching absurd levels of cartoon villainy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

It’s appalling. Alito reaching absurd levels of cartoon villainy.

As I’ve said: women aren’t people in the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's weird there are people who think medical pregnancy complications can be solved with relationship counseling. Any woman who gets pregnant can have emergency medical needs.

That's wild people who want to get pregnant/ are pregnant in Idaho may need to purchase emergency air transport insurance so they aren't bankrupted if they have a medical emergency.

Oral arguments in Idaho’s desperate attempt to kill women in the name of “life” took place this morning.

I wonder how many women have died.

I wonder why forced birthers think so little of women that they’re okay with emergency care being portioned out to the lucky few in dollops like this.

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

Leo is one of the most dangerous people in America. He is a religious but job who wants to force his beliefs down everyone's throat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

It’s appalling. Alito reaching absurd levels of cartoon villainy.

As I’ve said: women aren’t people in the GOP.

+1

[Anonymous]

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

Leo is one of the most dangerous people in America. He is a religious but job who wants to force his beliefs down everyone's throat.


And he has picked the Supreme Court justices who will help him do just that. Could anything but rigid religion make anyone think that it makes sense to let a woman die rather than end a pregnancy in which the fetus cannot be saved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

Leo is one of the most dangerous people in America. He is a religious but job who wants to force his beliefs down everyone's throat.


And he has picked the Supreme Court justices who will help him do just that. Could anything but rigid religion make anyone think that it makes sense to let a woman die rather than end a pregnancy in which the fetus cannot be saved?
It’s misogyny, pure and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I wonder what lies the forced birthers (bought and paid for by Leonard Leo and his dirty friends) will tell as they rule against women’s lives.

Leo is one of the most dangerous people in America. He is a religious but job who wants to force his beliefs down everyone's throat.

And he has picked the Supreme Court justices who will help him do just that. Could anything but rigid religion make anyone think that it makes sense to let a woman die rather than end a pregnancy in which the fetus cannot be saved?
It’s misogyny, pure and simple.
There’s a whole political party that supports Leonard Leo. And Project 2025, which is also partially his brainchild.

It’s not a single person, it’s a whole party that has turned its back on liberal democracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

What nightmares does today hold?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand how this case is at all related to anything "anti-abortion:"

Consider what happened to a woman who was nine months pregnant and having contractions when she arrived at the Falls Community Hospital in Marlin, Texas, in July 2022, a week after the Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion. The doctor on duty refused to see her.

“The physician came to the triage desk and told the patient that we did not have obstetric services or capabilities,” hospital staff told federal investigators during interviews, according to documents. “The nursing staff informed the physician that we could test her for the presence of amniotic fluid. However, the physician adamantly recommended the patient drive to a Waco hospital.”

Waco hospital is just over 30 minutes from Falls Community.
I am wondering why a 9 month pregnant woman would go to a hospital that does not have OB services. Did she not have any prenatal care and know what hospital she was scheduled to deliver at? I would never dream of showing up at a hospital with no OB services and expect them to deliver a baby.

Are you insane?

The pregnant woman felt contractions and went to the nearest hospital.

Are you seriously blaming a pregnant woman for seeking medical care at a hospital? She should automatically know that she needs to drive at least another 30 minutes—hope the contractions aren’t too close together!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

It’s appalling. Alito reaching absurd levels of cartoon villainy.

It's shocking how much conservatives actually hate women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is no one talking about the gross absurdity of yesterday's Supreme Court argument? "Well, if a state has decided that it's better that a woman die instead of having an abortion, who are we stop them?"

Even Justice Barrett was shocked by the indifference shown by the Idaho lawyer, and that doctors who make a professional judgment that an abortion is needed medical care could end up being prosecuted.

Justice Barrett asked what would happen if a local prosecutor did not agree with a doctor’s judgment that an abortion was necessary.

When Mr. Turner answered that “it is very case by case,” Justice Barrett joined in: “I’m kind of shocked actually because I thought your own expert had said below that these kinds of cases were covered,” she said.

Even as Mr. Turner responded that such cases would be covered if a doctor acted in good faith, Justice Barrett continued to probe.

“What if the prosecutor thought differently?” she asked. “What if the prosecutor thought, well, I don’t think any good-faith doctor could draw that conclusion.”

“That, your honor, is the nature of prosecutorial discretion, and it may result in a case,” Mr. Turner said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/us/politics/supreme-court-idaho-abortion-ban.html

It’s appalling. Alito reaching absurd levels of cartoon villainy.

It's shocking how much conservatives actually hate women.

Yet millions of women will still vote for Trump because he is supposedly better for the economy. It's like the Charge of the Light Brigade.