I don’t know how an IUD doesn’t expose a woman or physician to legal liability under this law. It’s similar to the texas law, but applies starting at conception.
I think they’re going to have a very tough time enforcing that law:
Abortion Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
- : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as
a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation
Our second pregnancy was technically an aborted pregnancy; but we usually tell others it was a miscarriage to make it clear that it wasn’t our choice that the pregnancy ended.
I read another article about women being denied treatment for miscarriages in alabama for fear of violating anti abortion laws.
The problem is that “abortion” is not a medical procedure. Instead its a general intent that can be manifest in all sorts of different actions.
1 Like
In medical jargon, there are spontaneous abortions and induced abortions. Some induced abortions are induced after the fetus or embryo has already died, or because it’s in a place where it will kill the mother, or otherwise has no chance of surviving.
The terminology is complicated.
And I’m sorry for your loss.
The NYT article doesn’t give a link to the law. I think this is it: Bill Text: OK HB4327 | 2022 | Regular Session | Engrossed | LegiScan
“Abortion” means the act of using, prescribing,
administering, procuring, or selling of any instrument, medicine,
drug, or any other substance, device, or means with the purpose to
terminate the pregnancy of a woman, with knowledge that the
termination by any of those means will with reasonable likelihood
cause the death of an unborn child. It does not include the use,
prescription, administration, procuring, or selling
of Plan B, morning-after pills, or any other type of contraception or emergency
> contraception. An act is not an abortion if the act is performed
with the purpose to:
a. save the life or preserve the health of the unborn
child,
b. remove a dead unborn child caused by spontaneous
abortion, or
c. remove an ectopic pregnancy;
Issues with IUDs and Plan B always come up with these laws.
Also:
K. Notwithstanding any other law, a civil action under this
section may not be brought:
- Against the woman upon whom an abortion was performed
So, even in this extreme case, they aren’t willing to cross that line.
1 Like
ITA.
Thanks. This was about 19 years ago.
typo? Not sure how an abortive procedure would save that child.
My guess after seeing some of these proposed new laws is not a typo, just ignorance.
I believe a procedure performed to save a fetus, that fails
1 Like
Ah . . . that makes sense.
That’s a good guess. It looked weird to me, too.
That was my guess, too. There are some risky procedures sometimes done on fetuses. Like if a fetus has a malformed heart it can sometimes be surgically repaired before it’s born, so it doesn’t die shortly after delivery. But I’m sure that also carries a risk of killing the fetus.
Yeah, seems like that’s gotta be it.
One of my BFFs started bleeding heavily at 25 weeks and after a phone consult with an OB-GYN was told to get to the nearest hospital with a Level III NICU right away.
They did an emergency C-section and delivered a 1 lb 14 oz baby. They were saying 10% chance he’d make it. I imagine they’re trying to prevent the doctors/hospital from getting sued in the 90% chance that such a baby dies.
(Happily my friend’s son is now almost 22 years old, and doing fine. A few health challenges along the way, but nothing life threatening after his 4 month stay in the NICU.)
Trump endorsed state rep candidate in MI wants to make birth control illegal.
1 Like
we know what they’re coming for next
3 Likes
yep.
2 Likes
Moving today’s posts to a new thread, to make it easier to follow along.
1 Like