Republican utopia - Texas!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP... what's happening in Texas and elsewhere is an atrocity. Heathcare needs should be determined by doctors and qualified medical professionals, NOT attorneys, judges and legislators.

Aborting every baby because their mother is experiencing a high risk pregnancy is not healthcare.

Spouting nonsense is not useful to this discussion. Not a single poster said that "aborting every baby because their mother is experiencing a high risk pregnancy is healthcare".

Yet no one is talking about solutions for women besides abortion, This woman didn’t want an abortion.

The only solution offered in this thread is abortion, even if a woman doesn’t want one.

The solution for all women is not doctors aborting every baby because of pregnancy complications. But that’s all you talk about.

There are other options for a woman with pregnancy complications and none of them are considered by people who think abortion is the answer to every woman’s pregnancy complications.

Dp- no one has said abortion is the only answer. You aren’t able to discuss this honestly and in good faith.
This woman’s doctors were unable to speak honestly and thoroughly about her condition.
So we will never know what her choice was. She wasn’t given all the information to make it.

So what other option should this woman had had, in your opinion?

My opinion is that her doctor should have been able to give her all of the information about her condition and all of the information regarding best treatment.
Texas has made that illegal.
If she had all the information to make a decision, that would be fine.
She was not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP... what's happening in Texas and elsewhere is an atrocity. Heathcare needs should be determined by doctors and qualified medical professionals, NOT attorneys, judges and legislators.

Aborting every baby because their mother is experiencing a high risk pregnancy is not healthcare.

Spouting nonsense is not useful to this discussion. Not a single poster said that "aborting every baby because their mother is experiencing a high risk pregnancy is healthcare".

Yet no one is talking about solutions for women besides abortion, This woman didn’t want an abortion.

The only solution offered in this thread is abortion, even if a woman doesn’t want one.

The solution for all women is not doctors aborting every baby because of pregnancy complications. But that’s all you talk about.

There are other options for a woman with pregnancy complications and none of them are considered by people who think abortion is the answer to every woman’s pregnancy complications.

Dp- no one has said abortion is the only answer. You aren’t able to discuss this honestly and in good faith.
This woman’s doctors were unable to speak honestly and thoroughly about her condition.
So we will never know what her choice was. She wasn’t given all the information to make it.

So what other option should this woman had had, in your opinion?

Early in her pregnancy when her first serious complications appeared she should have been counseled of the dangers of continuing the pregnancy and offered and abortion.

If she chose to continue she should have had the insurance coverage and social safety net to make she she got the care she needed including paid bed rest so that she didn’t have to make a decision to work against medical advice; at 21 or so weeks when it was really really bad she should have been offered to have the pregnancy terminated. If she said no she was taking her chances she should have been kept in the hospital —paid for so she didn’t worry about $$$$ — and then delivered once she got past viability around 24 weeks. With all her preemie bills paid for by decent health insurance.

That’s what we are advocating for. Try getting conservatives to agree to that. Ya’ll just blame her for being obese and getting pregnant and say not on my taxpayer dime and then pay yourself on the back for being “pro-life.” Hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We won’t really know what her choice was, because she didn’t have one.
I remember reading an article about a Covid denier who rode his bike to Sturgis, before there was an available vaccine.
He felt super good about his choice on his ride out to the rally. He literally said if he died, well so be it, he was doing what he loved.
Cut to him in the ICU a month later. He didn’t want to die was regretting his decision.
But at least he had a choice.
Was this woman made aware of the risks and consequences? I’m skeptical.
Keeping women in the dark about their circumstances and the best medical advice isn’t pro life.

We do know what this woman thought:

“Leticia wasn’t as sure, recalling something Yeni said in passing after her improvement in the Austin I.C.U.: that if a doctor had to choose between saving her or saving Selene, her daughter should come first. Leticia had responded, half in jest, “And who exactly is going to take care of Selene?” “Well, you, Mami!” Yeni said. “Me?” Leticia teased. “If you leave, you better take Selene with you!” Laughing, the women laid the subject to rest, never to discuss it again."“

This loving mother told her mom her baby girl came first.

I really don’t know what you want to happen after a pregnant woman tells her own mother her baby comes first. The doctors to hold her down and an anesthesiologist administer general sedation and the medical team remove her healthy baby by force?

If anyone reads the linked article, they can read that this woman was morbidly obese, had diabetes, other significant health problems, was not enrolled in the medicaid program she was entitled to be receiving healthcare benefits from, working a physical job while very sick and pregnant, and unable to afford her needed medication because she was not enrolled in medicaid.

Her husband (who left town with her car after her and their baby girl’s death, weird) should have taken control of the situation and helped his wife enroll in medicaid and supported her financially while she was working and desperately ill. It’s a messed up situation that unfortunately ended in this woman and her baby dying. She didn’t want an abortion.

Pretty soon, news stories about pregnant women being killed by their husbands and boyfriends (which happens all too often tragically, it’s scary) and democrats will be blaming their deaths on their inability to get abortions After all, if the women could have only killed their unborn babies, their husbands/boyfriends wouldn’t have had to kill them.

How was it a choice when she wasn’t given the option to end the pregnancy or deliver it after 23 weeks when it might have been viable? That’s not a choice. Did her doctors tell her when she was first having serious problems in her pregnancy that she should consider terminating? No they did not because they are in Texas where that is illegal.

If she had been given the option of terminating or delivering early, and she said no, fair enough. That would be her choice.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that in states like Texas women especially poor women have no choice?

Women are not offered abortions by their ob-gyns or family doctors because they are obese and/or diabetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pregnancy is also a medical condition and, in some cases, a life threatening one. If it is life threatening, ending the medical condition of pregnancy to save the living human is the best course of action. Until we develop a way to keep zygotes/fetuses growing outside a uterus, these are the decisions that must be made and the already living being should always have precedence until viability.

In which states can a woman not end a pregnancy to save her life?
And, it is important to note that many pregnancies are considered at risk.
Ending a pregnancy when there are challenges should not be the first course of action, especially if the mother does not want it.

In which states can a women carry a pregnancy and make decisions about her care with her doctor, not involving lawyers and legislators and courts and vigilantes, etc. Carry your pregnancies in those states ladies if you can. Look to receive modern medical care instead of some backwards, compromised care.

Which is exactly what this woman did.

She lived where she wanted. She was pregnant and wanted to be pregnant.

Yet it’s a problem how?

She is dead.

Would she be alive if he care was governed by different laws that allowed for different medical advice and care?

Would she be alive if she had not been morbidly obese?

Would she be alive if she taken the opportunity to enroll in Medicaid?

Would she be alive if she had taken her entitlement to receive free (paid for by Texas) and necessary medications, and taken the dose of medications as her doctor prescribed, instead of trying to work while seriously ill?

Would she be alive if she could have rested at home instead of working while seriously ill?

Would she be alive if she and her husband had left their home and rented an apartment in Dallas by a major medical center?

Would she be alive if she had exercised and eaten a healthy diet before becoming pregnant, lost weight to improve her chances of a healthy pregnancy?

Would she be alive if her husband had taken care of their family’s financial situation while she was pregnant?

This is one of the most ridiculous debates about abortion I have ever encountered.

A clearly unhealthy woman becomes pregnant and is ecstatic with her pregnancy.

Her husband doesn’t support her financially and she is forced to work.

While her health continues to fail, she still does not enroll in Medicaid.

She tells her mom she wants her baby to be saved over her in case of medical emergency.

The push to abort wanted, healthy babies over the choice of their own mothers to continue their pregnancies isn’t offensive to people?

Every baby must be aborted no matter what, no exceptions. Mom wants her baby? Too bad, abort. All women must have abortions. It makes the women who chose to have abortions because they didn’t want to be pregnant feel less guilty, apparently.

There you have it folks, the conservative talking point about dead mothers: it’s their fault. Shouldn’t have gotten pregnant in the first place. Shouldn’t have been so poor, so unhealthy. No insurance? Too bad so sad, not our fault. Nothing we can do but force sick women to go to term even if it kills both them and the fetus. At least it would be god’s will and not a human killing the baby. Somehow that is “pro-life.” And “for the people.”

[Anonymous]

People moving to Texas

Feeing California

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We won’t really know what her choice was, because she didn’t have one.
I remember reading an article about a Covid denier who rode his bike to Sturgis, before there was an available vaccine.
He felt super good about his choice on his ride out to the rally. He literally said if he died, well so be it, he was doing what he loved.
Cut to him in the ICU a month later. He didn’t want to die was regretting his decision.
But at least he had a choice.
Was this woman made aware of the risks and consequences? I’m skeptical.
Keeping women in the dark about their circumstances and the best medical advice isn’t pro life.

We do know what this woman thought:

“Leticia wasn’t as sure, recalling something Yeni said in passing after her improvement in the Austin I.C.U.: that if a doctor had to choose between saving her or saving Selene, her daughter should come first. Leticia had responded, half in jest, “And who exactly is going to take care of Selene?” “Well, you, Mami!” Yeni said. “Me?” Leticia teased. “If you leave, you better take Selene with you!” Laughing, the women laid the subject to rest, never to discuss it again."“

This loving mother told her mom her baby girl came first.

I really don’t know what you want to happen after a pregnant woman tells her own mother her baby comes first. The doctors to hold her down and an anesthesiologist administer general sedation and the medical team remove her healthy baby by force?

If anyone reads the linked article, they can read that this woman was morbidly obese, had diabetes, other significant health problems, was not enrolled in the medicaid program she was entitled to be receiving healthcare benefits from, working a physical job while very sick and pregnant, and unable to afford her needed medication because she was not enrolled in medicaid.

Her husband (who left town with her car after her and their baby girl’s death, weird) should have taken control of the situation and helped his wife enroll in medicaid and supported her financially while she was working and desperately ill. It’s a messed up situation that unfortunately ended in this woman and her baby dying. She didn’t want an abortion.

Pretty soon, news stories about pregnant women being killed by their husbands and boyfriends (which happens all too often tragically, it’s scary) and democrats will be blaming their deaths on their inability to get abortions After all, if the women could have only killed their unborn babies, their husbands/boyfriends wouldn’t have had to kill them.

How was it a choice when she wasn’t given the option to end the pregnancy or deliver it after 23 weeks when it might have been viable? That’s not a choice. Did her doctors tell her when she was first having serious problems in her pregnancy that she should consider terminating? No they did not because they are in Texas where that is illegal.

If she had been given the option of terminating or delivering early, and she said no, fair enough. That would be her choice.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that in states like Texas women especially poor women have no choice?

Women are not offered abortions by their ob-gyns or family doctors because they are obese and/or diabetic.

No but when they have a life-threatening pregnancy they are. Except in Texas and other red states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People moving to Texas

Feeing California

There are many way better alternatives than Texas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People moving to Texas

Feeing California

There are many way better alternatives than Texas.

If you want to have the best care for pregnant women, avoid Texas.

[Anonymous]

And her doctor should have had the entire range of medical options available for the patient, including abortion.

[Anonymous]

Why couldn’t they deliver her early at 23 weeks? That seems to be when this situation could have had the best possible outcome available.

Yes, I realize that is extreme prematurity. But that would have given both the best possible chance of survival.

After having read this, the obvious answer here is pregnancy was the condition that was causing her other conditions to escalate and lead to her and her daughter’s death. Maybe she would have chosen to remain pregnant, but it is pretty clear that being in TX limited her care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pregnancy is also a medical condition and, in some cases, a life threatening one. If it is life threatening, ending the medical condition of pregnancy to save the living human is the best course of action. Until we develop a way to keep zygotes/fetuses growing outside a uterus, these are the decisions that must be made and the already living being should always have precedence until viability.

In which states can a woman not end a pregnancy to save her life?
And, it is important to note that many pregnancies are considered at risk.
Ending a pregnancy when there are challenges should not be the first course of action, especially if the mother does not want it.

Did you miss the recent case where the Texas AG personally went after a woman who wanted to end a much-wanted pregnancy to save her life?
She ended up having to go to another state to get that abortion.

Oh we know, you ghouls think she should be bleeding out in a parking lot before the state gives the green light to the abortion. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Maternal Health Conditions
For people with certain severe medical problems, the biological stress of pregnancy can be dangerous or deadly.

These situations could include a severely compromised heart or a new diagnosis of dangerous cancer requiring immediate treatment.

These cases are unusual and recommending a termination is not done lightly. Your doctor should thoroughly assess the risks and benefits of continuing your pregnancy, including your wishes, and work with you to choose a satisfactory treatment plan.

It's important to note that it is possible for some women to receive chemotherapy during pregnancy, at least during the second and third trimester. If you are diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy it is important to work with both an obstetrician who specializes in high-risk pregnancies and an oncologist who is comfortable treating women who are pregnant.

Severe Pre-Eclampsia
Rarely, a woman can develop severe pre-eclampsia before a fetus is viable (can live outside the womb). Because the only known cure for pre-eclampsia is delivery, it may be necessary to end a pregnancy to save a mother's life.13 Continuing a pregnancy with severe pre-eclampsia can lead to seizures, kidney failure, stroke, liver complications, and death.


Selective Reduction
In multiple pregnancies, your doctor may recommend a selective reduction, or terminating one or more of the fetuses. This is intended to decrease risk to the other babies or the mother. For example, if in vitro fertilization is done and seven embryos implant, a woman may choose to reduce this to two or three in order to prevent the likely loss of all the embryos.

Premature Rupture of Membranes
Premature rupture of membranes (PROM) is a condition in which the bag of waters (amniotic sac) breaks before the pregnancy reaches full term.11 There are many reasons why this happens.

If PROM occurs prior to 24 weeks gestation, physicians may recommend a therapeutic termination because the lack of fluid will severely impair the normal development of the baby’s organs. There is also a high risk of infection for the pregnant person. If you become infected, ending your pregnancy may be the only cure.

https://www.verywellfamily.com/reasons-for-therapeutic-termination-2371295#:~:text=It%20is%20only%20recommended%20in,death%20by%20continuing%20the%20pregnancy.

These are reasons doctors generally recommend women terminate their pregnancies for the sake of the health of the mother.

Being morbidly obese, diabetic and not taking your medication aren’t reasons for pregnancy termination.


The most important issue everyone here is avoiding is this:


Attitudes toward termination of pregnancy are a matter of individual conviction and conscience that should be respected.


If a woman does not want to abort her baby, even if she is facing death, or the baby is facing disability and/or death, the mother will not be forced to abort her baby.

You all are 100% all in on upholding the individual conviction of a woman to have an abortion, even if she is healthy and the baby is healthy.

You all respect a woman’s decision to abort her baby at any time. Some women even believe a baby who is born should be allowed to be “aborted.”


"[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/31/politics/ralph-northam-third-trimester-abortion/index.html

But should a woman choose to continue a high risk pregnancy, nobody is out there fighting for her to keep her baby and both baby and mom receive the best care possible to both live.

This woman’s death and her baby’s death: why aren’t medical professionals and women who are concerned with their deaths bringing attention to Texas women who are geographically isolated and the lack of medical facilities that specialize in maternal care?

Ask the Texas State government to study her case specifically and others like hers. Women deserve good care for their pregnancies. Find a way to try and help Texas women get that care. Women should not have to abort their wanted babies because their hometown is geographically isolated.

Texas is a big, big state. I have lived in South Texas, West Texas, and New Mexico. The challenge of providing pregnant Texas women with high risk pregnancies good medical care during their pregnancy is a big, big issue that will need big, big solutions. But something other than telling pregnant women to either abort their babies or die can be done. I refuse to believe that’s all we as a society can offer our pregnant women and their babies.

Even if women with high risk pregnancies in isolated areas are admitted to their closest hospital that provides the level of maternal care they need to continue their pregnancy safely. No mother should be told she has to abort her baby if there is medical care available to allow her to safely continue her pregnancy.

Texas has a lot of issues with providing medical care to citizens in isolated and geographically remote areas. There are not enough medical doctors to provide care to the huge state and population. Even in larger areas, obtaining medical care, finding a family pcp, is sometimes impossible. Doctors are overwhelmed and it has been made worse by the overwhelming number of immigrants who have come into America. This woman was an immigrant.

If you care about women, offer them more than killing their wanted babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why couldn’t they deliver her early at 23 weeks? That seems to be when this situation could have had the best possible outcome available.

Yes, I realize that is extreme prematurity. But that would have given both the best possible chance of survival.

After having read this, the obvious answer here is pregnancy was the condition that was causing her other conditions to escalate and lead to her and her daughter’s death. Maybe she would have chosen to remain pregnant, but it is pretty clear that being in TX limited her care.

They didnt' offer that to her, most likely because of Texas's draconian laws. 23 weeks is still super early and 40% of babies delivered then don't survive. No one wants the state coming after them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maternal Health Conditions
For people with certain severe medical problems, the biological stress of pregnancy can be dangerous or deadly.

These situations could include a severely compromised heart or a new diagnosis of dangerous cancer requiring immediate treatment.

These cases are unusual and recommending a termination is not done lightly. Your doctor should thoroughly assess the risks and benefits of continuing your pregnancy, including your wishes, and work with you to choose a satisfactory treatment plan.

It's important to note that it is possible for some women to receive chemotherapy during pregnancy, at least during the second and third trimester. If you are diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy it is important to work with both an obstetrician who specializes in high-risk pregnancies and an oncologist who is comfortable treating women who are pregnant.

Severe Pre-Eclampsia
Rarely, a woman can develop severe pre-eclampsia before a fetus is viable (can live outside the womb). Because the only known cure for pre-eclampsia is delivery, it may be necessary to end a pregnancy to save a mother's life.13 Continuing a pregnancy with severe pre-eclampsia can lead to seizures, kidney failure, stroke, liver complications, and death.


Selective Reduction
In multiple pregnancies, your doctor may recommend a selective reduction, or terminating one or more of the fetuses. This is intended to decrease risk to the other babies or the mother. For example, if in vitro fertilization is done and seven embryos implant, a woman may choose to reduce this to two or three in order to prevent the likely loss of all the embryos.

Premature Rupture of Membranes
Premature rupture of membranes (PROM) is a condition in which the bag of waters (amniotic sac) breaks before the pregnancy reaches full term.11 There are many reasons why this happens.

If PROM occurs prior to 24 weeks gestation, physicians may recommend a therapeutic termination because the lack of fluid will severely impair the normal development of the baby’s organs. There is also a high risk of infection for the pregnant person. If you become infected, ending your pregnancy may be the only cure.

https://www.verywellfamily.com/reasons-for-therapeutic-termination-2371295#:~:text=It%20is%20only%20recommended%20in,death%20by%20continuing%20the%20pregnancy.

These are reasons doctors generally recommend women terminate their pregnancies for the sake of the health of the mother.

Being morbidly obese, diabetic and not taking your medication aren’t reasons for pregnancy termination.


The most important issue everyone here is avoiding is this:


Attitudes toward termination of pregnancy are a matter of individual conviction and conscience that should be respected.


If a woman does not want to abort her baby, even if she is facing death, or the baby is facing disability and/or death, the mother will not be forced to abort her baby.

You all are 100% all in on upholding the individual conviction of a woman to have an abortion, even if she is healthy and the baby is healthy.

You all respect a woman’s decision to abort her baby at any time. Some women even believe a baby who is born should be allowed to be “aborted.”


"[Third trimester abortions are] done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/01/31/politics/ralph-northam-third-trimester-abortion/index.html

But should a woman choose to continue a high risk pregnancy, nobody is out there fighting for her to keep her baby and both baby and mom receive the best care possible to both live.

This woman’s death and her baby’s death: why aren’t medical professionals and women who are concerned with their deaths bringing attention to Texas women who are geographically isolated and the lack of medical facilities that specialize in maternal care?

Ask the Texas State government to study her case specifically and others like hers. Women deserve good care for their pregnancies. Find a way to try and help Texas women get that care. Women should not have to abort their wanted babies because their hometown is geographically isolated.

Texas is a big, big state. I have lived in South Texas, West Texas, and New Mexico. The challenge of providing pregnant Texas women with high risk pregnancies good medical care during their pregnancy is a big, big issue that will need big, big solutions. But something other than telling pregnant women to either abort their babies or die can be done. I refuse to believe that’s all we as a society can offer our pregnant women and their babies.

Even if women with high risk pregnancies in isolated areas are admitted to their closest hospital that provides the level of maternal care they need to continue their pregnancy safely. No mother should be told she has to abort her baby if there is medical care available to allow her to safely continue her pregnancy.

Texas has a lot of issues with providing medical care to citizens in isolated and geographically remote areas. There are not enough medical doctors to provide care to the huge state and population. Even in larger areas, obtaining medical care, finding a family pcp, is sometimes impossible. Doctors are overwhelmed and it has been made worse by the overwhelming number of immigrants who have come into America. This woman was an immigrant.

If you care about women, offer them more than killing their wanted babies.

Sure, but therapeutic abortions should be one of the options available for patient and doctor in life-threatening situations. The state should not be restricting options. It should be making more options available.

Did you know that Texas rejected accepting expanded medicaid benefits?
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/medicaid-expansion-benefits-legislature/

Texas also has more uninsured residents than any other state—both per capita (18 percent) and by sheer number (more than five million)—and that number will grow in the coming months as pandemic-era policies expire, with hundreds of thousands of Texans losing Medicaid coverage.

There’s a straightforward way to significantly reduce this number of uninsured Texans, with the federal government footing most of the bill, but the state’s Republican leaders have consistently refused it. When the Affordable Care Act became law in 2010, the bill’s authors sought to close the “coverage gap” by introducing a new marketplace for health insurance, for which Americans earning low incomes would be eligible to receive federal subsidies helping them pay for coverage. For those who even then couldn’t afford a marketplace plan, the bill would expand Medicaid—a joint state and federal insurance program.

In 2012 the Supreme Court struck down the ACA provision requiring states to expand their Medicaid programs. Instead states were allowed to opt in. Gradually legislators across the country determined the program was a good deal and enrolled. Today 40 states have committed to adopt Medicaid expansion. But not Texas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, “elective” is also a fraught term

Birthing children is fraught. You do not need to involve yourself in other women's reproductive decisions. You have your own fraught reproductive journey so concern yourself with that. Your birthing issues are none of my business.

I was arguing with the person who was parsing the term abortion.

“Elective” doesn’t actually get into the nuances, either. Not all of the abortions that might fit under this term are done because the person just doesn’t want to be pregnant.

I’m With you that we shouldn’t be involving ourselves in any of it. This should all be up to the person that is pregnant and their doctor(s)

Ironic, the people posting here don’t agree with this woman’s right to choose to be pregnant.

^^^Willful misreading. It's been said time and again in this thread that this woman should have had a better social safety net, had better health insurance, had paid sick leave so that she could go on bed rest, have doctors who could talk to her about EVERYTHING including the option of terminating, should have had the option of delivering at the point of viability. But you conservatives refuse to engage with those issues at all.

Besides her death, what is horrifying is the reality and consequences of a state refusing to give women the choice of continuing or ending a pregnancy. If they choose to against medical advice there should be safeguards to help them. But if they decide they don't want to risk dying they should also have the option of ending their pregnancy. You are making this specifically about this one horrific story. When it's a much larger story about what pregnant women in Texas face. Will you step up and speak if there's a story about a woman who wanted to terminate a pregnancy, was not given that option, and then died? Will you? Doubtful. You'll find a way to blame her for her own death.