Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

This is LITERALLY quote tweeting an AP headline.

Of course it is. Where are the stories in the Wall Street Journal, NYT, Fox, CNN, NYT, Washington Post etc etc? This should be top of the fold every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Forced birthers like to pretend that they care about life, but scratch that pond scum and you can see the PP for the monster that he is. It’s about controlling and punishing women and incels like this PP are mad as hops that their personalities have driven women far away from them. Killing women, breaking their hearts, destroying their families, robbing them of their future fertility - it’s all good because it punishes those nasty women for not jumping in the sack with them. Of course if they ever had jumped in the sack with that man, we know the names they’d call the women who had sex with them.

So vote carefully in November. It’s a straight Democratic ticket. The GOP and its misogyny must actually start getting crushed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

This is LITERALLY quote tweeting an AP headline.

Yeah but how much coverage is this getting, really?

New York Times doesn’t have abortion anywhere on the front page, certainly not this story (they do have an above the fold story about the flamingo in the Hamptons, though! Really important work!).

It’s not on ABC News, CBS News or NBC News.

To Wapo’s newly right wing credit, they do actually have it within the top five stories of the online edition.

It’s one of those issues that’s not massive, I suppose, until it happens to a family, and then it is the probably the largest tragedy that could happen with more danger, more money, more risk and all to assuage the religious fanaticism of Christian nationalists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

This is LITERALLY quote tweeting an AP headline.

Yeah but how much coverage is this getting, really?

New York Times doesn’t have abortion anywhere on the front page, certainly not this story (they do have an above the fold story about the flamingo in the Hamptons, though! Really important work!).

It’s not on ABC News, CBS News or NBC News.

To Wapo’s newly right wing credit, they do actually have it within the top five stories of the online edition.

It’s one of those issues that’s not massive, I suppose, until it happens to a family, and then it is the probably the largest tragedy that could happen with more danger, more money, more risk and all to assuage the religious fanaticism of Christian nationalists.

Agree that the media is way under reporting on this issue. I don't think that that will effect the voting in November.

An enormous number of voters already fully understand the absolute critical nature of reproductive rights and intend to do what they can to vote to protect them. They should be seeing ads and news stories on this issue. But with or without those, they are highly motivated and determined get out and fight for this right in November. This is already set in stone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why is the media not reporting on this?

This is LITERALLY quote tweeting an AP headline.

Yeah but how much coverage is this getting, really?

New York Times doesn’t have abortion anywhere on the front page, certainly not this story (they do have an above the fold story about the flamingo in the Hamptons, though! Really important work!).

It’s not on ABC News, CBS News or NBC News.

To Wapo’s newly right wing credit, they do actually have it within the top five stories of the online edition.

It’s one of those issues that’s not massive, I suppose, until it happens to a family, and then it is the probably the largest tragedy that could happen with more danger, more money, more risk and all to assuage the religious fanaticism of Christian nationalists.

Agree that the media is way under reporting on this issue. I don't think that that will effect the voting in November.

An enormous number of voters already fully understand the absolute critical nature of reproductive rights and intend to do what they can to vote to protect them. They should be seeing ads and news stories on this issue. But with or without those, they are highly motivated and determined get out and fight for this right in November. This is already set in stone.

I agree. I simply find it repugnant the media, blasted by the GOP as “liberal,” has watched the full citizenship of 50% of our population get taken away and they don’t really care enough to follow it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:EMTALA + anti-abortion states = a huge mess
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/19/oklahoma-abortion-emtala/

We’ll find out for sure soon but …
Supreme Court appears to side with Biden admin in abortion case, according to draft briefly posted on website
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/supreme-court-abortion-idaho-bloomberg/index.html

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Oh it seems like the fascists on the court were convinced to hold their fire this time until after the election. Too late. You guys already allowed all this pain, suffering and death to happen on your stupid watch.

[Anonymous]

But MY abortion would be a MORAL ABORTION, a good one! Why am I being punished for being a woman?!



(Also, Republican ladies: when you say you feel like you can’t be Democrats because Democrats don’t like femininity, this is the counterpoint to that. Your political party wants your indentured servitude. You can be a part of the decision making process until you can’t, even in your own marriage and body.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh it seems like the fascists on the court were convinced to hold their fire this time until after the election. Too late. You guys already allowed all this pain, suffering and death to happen on your stupid watch.

+1. The SCOTUS anti-women ship has sailed. The catastrophe of overturning roe can not be mitigated

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EMTALA + anti-abortion states = a huge mess
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/19/oklahoma-abortion-emtala/

We’ll find out for sure soon but …
Supreme Court appears to side with Biden admin in abortion case, according to draft briefly posted on website
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/supreme-court-abortion-idaho-bloomberg/index.html

They did not side with Biden really. They said we will decide later (like after the election).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But MY abortion would be a MORAL ABORTION, a good one! Why am I being punished for being a woman?!



(Also, Republican ladies: when you say you feel like you can’t be Democrats because Democrats don’t like femininity, this is the counterpoint to that. Your political party wants your indentured servitude. You can be a part of the decision making process until you can’t, even in your own marriage and body.)

Also their political party wants you to put up with those collapsed organs and disfigured body. Just the price you have to pay for pushing out them babies, suck it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EMTALA + anti-abortion states = a huge mess
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/19/oklahoma-abortion-emtala/

We’ll find out for sure soon but …
Supreme Court appears to side with Biden admin in abortion case, according to draft briefly posted on website
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/supreme-court-abortion-idaho-bloomberg/index.html

They did not side with Biden really. They said we will decide later (like after the election).

True, but for now, hospitals in Texas and Idaho must perform abortions if the patient’s life or health is at risk if they don’t, which wasn’t the case before. Also, the Fifth Circuit is batsh!t if a SCOTUS this conservative is batting them back this much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EMTALA + anti-abortion states = a huge mess
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/19/oklahoma-abortion-emtala/

We’ll find out for sure soon but …
Supreme Court appears to side with Biden admin in abortion case, according to draft briefly posted on website
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/26/politics/supreme-court-abortion-idaho-bloomberg/index.html

They did not side with Biden really. They said we will decide later (like after the election).

True, but for now, hospitals in Texas and Idaho must perform abortions if the patient’s life or health is at risk if they don’t, which wasn’t the case before. Also, the Fifth Circuit is batsh!t if a SCOTUS this conservative is batting them back this much.

A lot of women haven’t been able to get emergency abortions in a lot of forced birther states because they have to be clearly closer to death than to life. This isn’t a win. Having a bunch of old fascist toadies make medical decisions is still an all around bad idea.