make it make sense!Kyle Clark @KyleClark wrote: NEW: CO-4 GOP candidate Richard Holtorf has voted against abortion rights in the state legislature but said he respected his girlfriend's right to have an abortion "so she could live her best life." I asked him about that disconnect. #copolitics
x5
FTFY
Biden-Harris HQ @BidenHQ wrote: GOP Rep. Mace says women should stop complaining about their rights being taken away because they can just flee to “somewhere else”
US doctors struggle to get basic abortion training two years after fall of Roe
Post-Roe, doctors are scrambling to get trained amid bans, closed clinics and overburdened facilities
Carter Sherman
Mon 24 Jun 2024 13.00 CEST
The fall of Roe v Wade upended Dr Jasmine Chan’s career.
As a medical student, the Texas native wanted to provide abortions as an OB-GYN. But in 2022, as Chan prepared to apply for residency – a kind of years-long apprenticeship after medical school – she worried that the quirks of the residency placement process would keep her in Texas, which banned abortions after the US supreme court overturned Roe.
“I met with my advisers and I had very strong heart-to-heart conversations about how I couldn’t see myself practicing medicine if it didn’t include me getting to do abortions,” Chan said. Instead of becoming an OB-GYN, she decided to become a family medicine doctor – a less competitive specialty that increased her chances of finding a residency in a state that protects abortion access.
Now, two years into her residency program in New Jersey, Chan is preparing to finally get the training that she’s longed for her entire career. But, like many other doctors seeking abortion training after Roe’s demise, she will still have to overcome hurdles that didn’t exist just two years ago.
Over the next few months, Chan will pursue abortion training in two different clinics, the closest of which is three hours away, on top of her day job. In the fall, she’ll need to relocate entirely for training at a third clinic.
She’ll have to jump through all of those hoops because there just aren’t enough clinics left to train the US’s future doctors in a relatively quick, straightforward procedure that one in four women will undergo at some point in their lives.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/artic ... rs-ban-roe
A six-week abortion ban in Texas was linked to a 13% increase in the number of infants who died in their first year of life, a new study published Monday in JAMA Pediatrics suggests.
The study, published two years to the day since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade and permitted more than a dozen states across the country to outlaw almost all abortions, is one of the first glimpses into how strict abortion bans impact babies’ health.
The study also estimated that the ban may have led the number of infants in Texas who died within their first month of life to rise more than 10%.
Because Texas enacted its six-week abortion ban in September 2021, months before Roe’s demise, scholars have studied what has happened in Texas for clues about how post-Roe abortion bans are now affecting the rest of the nation. Some of the researchers involved in the Monday study have previously concluded that the Texas ban also led to 10,000 additional births.
“Texas is the harbinger of potentially what’s to come with Dobbs,” said Alison Gemmill, the lead author of the study and an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health said, referring to Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the case that overturned Roe. “One of the things we’re doing now, as you can imagine, is looking at Dobbs and infant mortality as a next step.”
The study found a 23% jump in infant deaths due to congenital anomalies – the kind of conditions that are often identified in utero and lead to abortions in states where the procedure is legal, since they can be incompatible with life. But that choice is no longer available to pregnant Texans.
“Prior to this policy, if an anomaly was detected, people would have had the ability to legally terminate at least up to maybe about 20 weeks, or even maybe 22 weeks gestation,” said Alison Gemmill, the lead author of the study and an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “Any infant death is tragic, but then layering on top of that, this pregnant person’s situation where they know that they’re carrying a fetus that is incompatible with life, whereas before, they maybe would have had the option to terminate.”
Let the little children suffer, for it shall build character.......raison de arizona wrote: ↑Mon Jun 24, 2024 6:20 pm Didn't Jesus say something about suffering little children? I can't remember if he was fer or agin it.
Heather Gardner @heathergtv wrote: Two years ago, SCOTUS overturned Roe v Wade, opening the floodgates of restrictions on our bodies.
If you think there’s no going back, think again… hilarious!
All jokes aside, the threat of a national ban and potential loss of reproductive freedom is no laughing matter.
CALL TO ACTIVISM @CalltoActivism wrote: YES!!! facts!!
Drop the mic.
#VoteDemToRestoreRoe
moarCALL TO ACTIVISM @CalltoActivism wrote: OUTRAGEOUS! An Oklahoma Woman with with a non-viable pregnancy says the hospital told her to sit in the parking lot “until you bleed out.”
Jaci Statton, 25, was sick and bleeding from her partial molar pregnancy but the Oklahoma abortion ban prevented doctors from performing any procedure to help her remove the life threatening tissue.
"Oklahoma has three abortion bans in effect, and each of them has different language in describing the medical exceptions," says Rabia Muqaddam, senior staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "It's resulted in extreme confusion about what constitutes a sufficient health condition for a doctor to provide a medically necessary abortion."
"A team of doctors and specialists came in and told us, 'There's nothing that we can do according to Oklahoma law. We can't even really touch you,'" Jaci recalls.
Jaci’s story is like potentially thousands like her. Women’s freedom isn’t just about choices, it’s literally about life and death.
If you are or have a wife, daughter, mother, or friend, we need to think about women’s freedom on a personal level. Their lives could be next.
#VoteDemToRestoreRoe
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-sho ... -pregnancy
The days wore on. Jaci says, by March 8, one doctor at the hospital began to talk about the need for her to travel out of state — to Kansas, Colorado, or New Mexico. Someone connected the family to Trust Women, which runs a reproductive health clinic in Wichita, and she was able to get in for an appointment two days later, on Friday, March 10.
She drove there with her husband and mother-in-law, hoping she wouldn't bleed on the drive. "It was probably the longest three hours of my life, in that vehicle," she says.
Biden-Harris HQ @BidenHQ wrote: Texas woman who was denied an abortion because of Donald Trump after discovering her baby would not survive: “It was hard and traumatizing... Knowing that your child is going to die and planning your child's funeral before they're even here is insane”
Biden-Harris HQ @BidenHQ wrote: Texas woman who went into septic shock after being denied an abortion because of Donald Trump: “I have to use a surrogate now because of what happened to me. The damage to my reproductive organs is permanent”
Biden-Harris HQ @BidenHQ wrote: Trump ally Jeff Durbin, leader of Republican opposition to Arizona abortion measure, says women deserve to be executed if they have an abortion: “You forfeit your right to live”
Rachel Vindman 🌻 @natsechobbyist wrote: His DC office phone number is 202-225-3211 & I thought a few of us could call & gently explain this is the United States of America & no one is forcing him to undergo an IVF cycle.
That said, he can leave the rest of us the fuck alone to make our own choices.Jake Sherman @JakeSherman wrote: >@RepRosendale says he’ll file an amendment to DOD funding bill that would ban funding for the use of IVF. He says IVF is “morally wrong.”
a blob of cells = children 
x5
Nicole Miller had gone to the emergency room in Boise, Idaho, after waking up with heavy bleeding in her 20th week of pregnancy. By afternoon, she was still leaking amniotic fluid and hemorrhaging and, now in a panic, struggling to understand why the doctor was telling her that she needed to leave the state to be treated.
“If I need saving, you’re not going to help me?” she recalls asking. She remembers his answer vividly: “He told me he wasn’t willing to risk his 20-year career.”
Instead, that evening, hospital workers at St. Luke’s Boise Medical Center put Ms. Miller on a small plane to Utah, where she said she gripped her husband’s hand — scared of flying but more terrified that she would never see her young daughters again. “I just need to stay alive so I can be around for my two other kids,” nurses reported her saying as she arrived at the hospital in Salt Lake City, 14 hours after she had arrived in the emergency room back home.
Only when she woke up the next morning did she understand, because a nurse told her, that she was airlifted so she could have an abortion.
“I couldn’t comprehend: I’m standing in front of doctors who know exactly what to do and how to help and they’re refusing to do it,” Ms. Miller said in an interview, her first since going through the ordeal last fall.
On Thursday, the United States Supreme Court declined to decide whether states that ban abortions, like Idaho, must comply with a federal law that requires emergency room doctors to provide abortions necessary to protect the health of a pregnant woman.
The justices sent the question back to the lower courts for trial, and in the meantime reinstated a lower-court order saying that the federal law, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, did apply.
Abortion opponents accuse the Biden administration of trying to use the federal law to turn emergency rooms into “abortion havens.” Exceptions to abortion bans, they say, already give doctors the same leeway to provide abortions in true medical emergencies.
The Biden administration’s push to apply the law “is a P.R. stunt to spread the lie that pro-life laws prevent women from receiving emergency care,” Katie Daniel, the state policy director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said after the court ruling on Thursday.
But doctors in Idaho and other states with near-total bans say that even with the renewed protection of federal law, they have little clarity about what medical emergencies are covered, and little reassurance that they will not face charges, jail time, large fines and loss of their medical licenses if they provide care a prosecutor says was not necessary.
“The transfers and the difficulty finding OB-GYNs who are willing to do the care are going to continue,” said Dr. Alison Haddock, the president-elect of the American College of Emergency Physicians, who is leaving her job in Houston this week for a position in the Pacific Northwest, in part because of the difficulty of working under Texas’ abortion ban.
Ms. Miller’s case illustrates the struggle for doctors. When she arrived at the emergency room at St. Luke’s in Boise just before 6 a.m. on Sept. 11, the federal law was under effect, because of the lower court ruling.
According to her account, which was verified by The New York Times, she had placental abruption and her water had broken prematurely, but doctors at St. Luke’s said they could not legally give her the care she needed. By the time they put her on the plane to Utah, they estimated she had lost a liter of blood.
Doctors at St. Luke’s, Idaho’s largest hospital system and biggest employer, say there was even more uncertainty after the Supreme Court temporarily suspended the law in January. In the four months after that, the hospital airlifted six pregnant women to other states for care; the previous year, there was just one, presumably Ms. Miller. (The hospital declined to discuss her case specifically, citing privacy laws.)
The state has lost nearly a quarter of its OB-GYNs and more than half its maternal-fetal medicine specialists since abortion bans took effect two years ago, many citing the uncertainty and difficulty of providing necessary care under the ban.
