Woman Forced to Leave Texas for Abortion

[bodecea]

Go to the link

I did. Did you?

 

[Lesh]

People with Down's can be very happy. One of the top models in the world has Down's. That's not a severe disability. When a child is born that has, at birth, the kind of disability that Terry Schiavo had when she died, abortion isn't up for discussion. Euthanasia is.

You think I'm all over the place without taking a stand. The fact is, I don't believe in absolutes. Not every pregnancy requires an abortion. Not every pregnancy should be carried to term.

So you think Texas is fucked up then.

Thank you

 

[Lakhota]

 

[EvilCat Breath]

So you think Texas is fucked up then.

Thank you

There is no way to know because we don't have enough information to make a decision either way.

 

[0311]

OMG, they have to go to another State for an abortion???? OMGOMGOMG

So very true, sad but very true.

 

[0311]

I haven't seen is stated that she did unless I missed it. One thing to also note... It is survivable, and it can also be misdiagnosed.

The fetus was NOT viable outside of the womb, it have died a painful ugly death. Further, the delivery of fetus would have killed the mother or rendered her incapble of having other children.

The State has no business deciding a Woman's Health Care.

 

[jc456]

I did. Did you?

I did. I quoted from it, duh

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Unless the woman is a baby , then she can die.
And that is your idea of insinuating" --- may you see your error and hate

You have no idea of the evil you are facilitating by your misguided support for sex-selective killing of female babies

"“Sex-selective abortion and female infanticide have led to lopsided sex ratios. In parts of India, for example, 126 boys are born for every 100 girls. This in turn leads to a shortage of marriageable women, which then leads to trafficking in persons, bride selling, and prostitution. "

Red herring fallacy; failed attempt to deflect.

The thread is about women forced to flee authoritarian red states to preserve their health or save their lives the consequence of reckless, irresponsible, cruel, and dystopian abortion ‘bans.’

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Texas Woman Who Sued For Emergency Abortion Leaves State As Court Rules Against Her

"She’s been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn’t wait any longer," one of her advocates said.

www.huffpost.com

If you have any doubts about Republicans trying to force births… even when there is no possibility of the fetus surviving this is it

This thread premise is false.

Texas Law provides for an exception if the mother's life is in danger. The decision is up to her physician, and she does not have to ask a court for permission. Her physician failed to meet the standard, which is simply "reasonable medical judgement."

The following text comes from the Texas ruling [Link] ...
--
The law allows an abortion when:
in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female . . . has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.
...If a doctor, using her “reasonable medical judgment,” decides that a pregnant woman has such a condition, then the exception applies, and Texas law does not prohibit the abortion.
In this case, the pleadings state that Ms. Cox’s doctor—Dr. Damla Karsan—believes Ms. Cox qualifies for an abortion based on the medical-necessity exception. But when she sued seeking a court’s pre-authorization, Dr. Karsan did not assert that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” or that, in Dr. Karsan’s reasonable medical judgment, an abortion is necessary because Ms. Cox has the type of condition the exception requires. No one disputes that Ms. Cox’s pregnancy has been extremely complicated. Any parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis. Some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.
A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment.
If Ms. Cox’s circumstances are, or have become, those that satisfy the statutory exception, no court order is needed. Nothing in this opinion prevents a physician from acting if, in that physician’s reasonable medical judgment, she determines that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” that places her “at risk of death” or “poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.”
--
All the media coverage is BS.

 

[Marchimedes]

Woman Forced to Leave Texas for Abortion​

At least in America she had that option. (Screams of "Not for the oppressed poor, Fascist.") Way I heard this story is this chick (same people, different focused group slogan) is pregnant with a baby (can we stop with this now?) who is doomed, zero chance, but the longerer this baby is carried the greater the chance of this woman losing reproductivity and her life yet she had the time to hire a lawyer, wait on court which moves at the speed of Billo and now the baby is dead and as the first group of geniuses pointed out she has cash. I get it, maybe this woman is risking her life to point out the fact that some men can't stand the little lady having to bother herself with such decisions like that's the first time that's been pointed out. Or she's a crazy person. For now (insert long list of names of prominent, liberal drive-by media talking head types who make their living decrying white men here) should get a charity going and take care or the oppressed poor women and hope that the rumor I heard at this site today that SCOTUS might look at the actual abortion side of this and I say SCOTUS might surprise ya'll. Both far ends of this issue are nuts and my end of it almost makes me not vote Republican.

-

47.5

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Liberals answer: Tell her to rip the baby out of herself and then charge her with murder.

 

[0311]

This thread premise is false.

Texas Law provides for an exception if the mother's life is in danger. The decision is up to her physician, and she does not have to ask a court for permission. Her physician failed to meet the standard, which is simply "reasonable medical judgement."

The following text comes from the Texas ruling [Link] ...
--
The law allows an abortion when:
in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female . . . has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.
...If a doctor, using her “reasonable medical judgment,” decides that a pregnant woman has such a condition, then the exception applies, and Texas law does not prohibit the abortion.
In this case, the pleadings state that Ms. Cox’s doctor—Dr. Damla Karsan—believes Ms. Cox qualifies for an abortion based on the medical-necessity exception. But when she sued seeking a court’s pre-authorization, Dr. Karsan did not assert that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” or that, in Dr. Karsan’s reasonable medical judgment, an abortion is necessary because Ms. Cox has the type of condition the exception requires. No one disputes that Ms. Cox’s pregnancy has been extremely complicated. Any parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis. Some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.
A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment.
If Ms. Cox’s circumstances are, or have become, those that satisfy the statutory exception, no court order is needed. Nothing in this opinion prevents a physician from acting if, in that physician’s reasonable medical judgment, she determines that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” that places her “at risk of death” or “poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.”
--
All the media coverage is BS.

Except for the fact that Tex-Ass Supreme stepped and blocked her from getting the abortion. She fled the state to the medical she needs

 

[Lesh]

This thread premise is false.

Texas Law provides for an exception if the mother's life is in danger. The decision is up to her physician, and she does not have to ask a court for permission. Her physician failed to meet the standard, which is simply "reasonable medical judgement."

The following text comes from the Texas ruling [Link] ...
--
The law allows an abortion when:
in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female . . . has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.
...If a doctor, using her “reasonable medical judgment,” decides that a pregnant woman has such a condition, then the exception applies, and Texas law does not prohibit the abortion.
In this case, the pleadings state that Ms. Cox’s doctor—Dr. Damla Karsan—believes Ms. Cox qualifies for an abortion based on the medical-necessity exception. But when she sued seeking a court’s pre-authorization, Dr. Karsan did not assert that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” or that, in Dr. Karsan’s reasonable medical judgment, an abortion is necessary because Ms. Cox has the type of condition the exception requires. No one disputes that Ms. Cox’s pregnancy has been extremely complicated. Any parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis. Some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.
A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment.
If Ms. Cox’s circumstances are, or have become, those that satisfy the statutory exception, no court order is needed. Nothing in this opinion prevents a physician from acting if, in that physician’s reasonable medical judgment, she determines that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” that places her “at risk of death” or “poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.”
--
All the media coverage is BS.

If it’s “up to the physician”, how could he possibly not meet the standard?

Totally stupid claim

 

[Lesh]

There is no way to know because we don't have enough information to make a decision either way.

Of course we do.

 

[jc456]

Red herring fallacy; failed attempt to deflect.

The thread is about women forced to flee authoritarian red states to preserve their health or save their lives the consequence of reckless, irresponsible, cruel, and dystopian abortion ‘bans.’

No woman is forced to do anything!! That’s the deflection

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Of course we do.

Have you personally seen all the medical records? Have you personally read all of the legal motions, oppositions and moving declarations?
No. Of course not. We don't have enough information for an opinion.

 

[tshrimp]

This thread premise is false.

Texas Law provides for an exception if the mother's life is in danger. The decision is up to her physician, and she does not have to ask a court for permission. Her physician failed to meet the standard, which is simply "reasonable medical judgement."

The following text comes from the Texas ruling [Link] ...
--
The law allows an abortion when:
in the exercise of reasonable medical judgment, the pregnant female . . . has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.
...If a doctor, using her “reasonable medical judgment,” decides that a pregnant woman has such a condition, then the exception applies, and Texas law does not prohibit the abortion.
In this case, the pleadings state that Ms. Cox’s doctor—Dr. Damla Karsan—believes Ms. Cox qualifies for an abortion based on the medical-necessity exception. But when she sued seeking a court’s pre-authorization, Dr. Karsan did not assert that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” or that, in Dr. Karsan’s reasonable medical judgment, an abortion is necessary because Ms. Cox has the type of condition the exception requires. No one disputes that Ms. Cox’s pregnancy has been extremely complicated. Any parents would be devastated to learn of their unborn child’s trisomy 18 diagnosis. Some difficulties in pregnancy, however, even serious ones, do not pose the heightened risks to the mother the exception encompasses.
A pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas. Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion in this very case if a physician determines that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard, using reasonable medical judgment.
If Ms. Cox’s circumstances are, or have become, those that satisfy the statutory exception, no court order is needed. Nothing in this opinion prevents a physician from acting if, in that physician’s reasonable medical judgment, she determines that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” that places her “at risk of death” or “poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.”
--
All the media coverage is BS.

Thanks for posting this. All we were getting was the slanted view of the person wanting the abortion. It looks clear it was not needed. Even her own doctor said it was not necessary. Thanks for shedding light on this. It would have been great if our media was more responsible and told us the full story.

 

[0311]

If it’s “up to the physician”, how could he possibly not meet the standard?

Totally stupid claim

Bear in mind that MAGA MAGGOTS only believe science when it comes from driveling mouth shit heads Rand Paul.

 

[0311]

If it’s “up to the physician”, how could he possibly not meet the standard?

Totally stupid claim

Bear in mind, MAGA MAGGOTS only science when shit heads like Rand Paul spout nonsense.

 

[Lesh]

Thanks for posting this. All we were getting was the slanted view of the person wanting the abortion. It looks clear it was not needed. Even her own doctor said it was not necessary. Thanks for shedding light on this. It would have been great if our media was more responsible and told us the full story.

“Clearly not needed”?

The fetus was not going to survive beyond days if it made it that far.

What’s wrong with you?