Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Republicans love this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They finally did it

Two years and one day and this thread is more relevant than ever. Remember, when the political pundits thought this little issue wouldn’t be salient?

For MAGA, salient is a fancy word for really, really important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

[Anonymous]

Infant mortality rates up! So. Much. Winning!

[Anonymous]

Despite Bans, Number of Abortions in the United States Increased in 2023

Policy Analysis
March 2024

New findings from the Monthly Abortion Provision Study show that an estimated 1,037,000 abortions occurred in the formal health care system in 2023, the first full calendar year after the US Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade. This represents a rate of 15.9 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age,* and is a 11% increase since 2020, the last year for which comprehensive estimates are available. It is also the highest number and rate measured in the United States in over a decade.

https://www.guttmacher.org/2024/03/despite-bans-number-abortions-united-states-increased-2023

[Anonymous]

Dobbs is the running mate of every Republican.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Infant mortality rates up! So. Much. Winning!

But Republicsbs think this is fine because at least those babies got to gasp a few breaths of air before they died. Who cares if they suffered the entire time. Life!!

Isn’t that right you anti-abortionists! The main thing is they got to be born. Doesn’t matter if they only “lived” a few hours or days, or if their mothers were forced to go through 20 more weeks of pregnancy knowing their baby had no chance of living. Doesn’t matter if their mother missed her chance of getting pregnant again because of being forced to go to term. If she’s so infertile it’s just god’s will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

This is LITERALLY quote tweeting an AP headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Infant mortality rates up! So. Much. Winning!

But Republicsbs think this is fine because at least those babies got to gasp a few breaths of air before they died. Who cares if they suffered the entire time. Life!!

Isn’t that right you anti-abortionists! The main thing is they got to be born. Doesn’t matter if they only “lived” a few hours or days, or if their mothers were forced to go through 20 more weeks of pregnancy knowing their baby had no chance of living. Doesn’t matter if their mother missed her chance of getting pregnant again because of being forced to go to term. If she’s so infertile it’s just god’s will.

It's not about saving unborn souls, it's about keeping those uppitiy Blacks and sluts in their place. If a few good Christen women get swept up in this, well, it's gods will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Cue MAGA - if you can't afforD Kids then Keep your leGs cloSed.

I mean are they wrong though?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But these we just innocent bAbiEs!!!

Another impact these bans have: economic hardship. Women forced to carry a non viable fetus is more likely to be put on bedrest, or reduced working. Then the birth costs $$$. Even the best insurance has a deductible. Then funeral arrangements $$$. We’re talking an easy 10k unnecessarily spent.

I won’t talk about the emotional costs because we know MAGA could give a 💩 about that.

Oh! Add more costs! At least some of them would have ended up living for a brief period, and depending on the hospital’s policy they might have thrown the kitchen sink, treatment wise, at the newborn, costing thousands in NICU bills.

This has probably bankrupted a few families already.

Just to give people an idea. I had twins that were born 6 weeks premature (34 weeks gestation). One had underdeveloped lungs and developed Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Basically his lungs could not extract enough oxygen from the air he was breathing. Within 12 hours, he was on a ventillator with almost pure oxygen and when that was insufficient, he underwent a surgical procedure where a surfactent was applied to his lungs which allowed his alveoli to process oxygen better. Within 2 hours of the procedure, he was breathing much more normally. By 12 hours post-surgery he was off of the ventillator. It was miraculous. The twins spent a total of 16 days in the NICU between this procedure and getting them to eat normally, gain weight and develop enough to maintain their body temperature outside of an incubator. All pretty normal stuff for premies. The NICU totals for my children were approximiately $170K per. And our insurance only wanted to cover about $100K of the costs per child trying to claim various issues. I spent a year fighting with them. A year, to the day that the twins came home from the hospital, I finally sent the last form to the insurance and got a revised claim from them. All told, I ended up paying about $13K out of pocket for both.

And this is for normal premie treatment and one extraordinary treatment. And my children were otherwise healthy babies (and are about to turn 13 this summer).

Now, imagine for a child with a congenital syndrome that requires massive amounts of medical attention, treatment, and remediation just to survive a week or two in the NICU and die. These laws are requiring pregnant women, who know that their child will not survive more than a few weeks, to carry the child, to undergo obstetric treatment for the remaining 20 weeks of pregnancy, to risk their own health and fertility, to pay for that medical care in pregnancy, then to give birth to a child suffering pain from the congenital disorder, and then to have NICU space, time, equipment, staff, attend to this child who were terminal before birth, taking away needed NICU space from babies with conditions that they can survive. Who is paying for all this medical treatment, medications, equipment, remediation for these infants?

I was able to handle $13K out of $340K worth or medical care and after a year of fighting was able to get the insurance company to handle the rest. But there are many, many families out there that cannot handle even $13K worth of medical expenses and may have weaker insurance coverage than I had. What if the insurance carrier will not handle the additional costs? What if they can't get the insurance company to bear the NICU costs? Are you going to make parents of much wanted, but terminally ill babies, go bankrupt or have to sell their home just to handle the medical expenses for a pregnancy that they were forced to carry to term just because you didn't want to allow them to abort a terminal infant with a congenital disorder that was incompatible with life?

These politicians are playing God, but they are destroying many lives over their politics.

Are any anti-abortionists brave enough to answer this question of how forcing women to birth babies doomed to die shortly will bankrupt parents -- are you going to support having the government pay these inevitable bills so that a woman who otherwise would get an abortion for a doomed pregnancy doesn't end up losing her home and maybe her costody of of other children because of medical bankruptcy? Are you?