I wouldn’t be surprised about incidents like this going on well before Roe v Wade got overturned.
Bullshit meter registering 85%.
I read the article. A patient with a ectopic pregnancy was misdiagnosed and sent out as a miscarriage. Then they claim the doctors were to afraid to treat her because of the ‘law’.
The reporter who wrote this, and the news service that published it, as well as the ‘political nutcases’ who quote it and misuse it are disgusting. Ectopic pregnancy is a emergency. Abortion pills don’t work, and it’s life and death. The fetus will rupture the fallopian tube, and it will kill the mother, and it will never go to term. This isn’t ‘un-necessary abortion’ this is life and death stuff. The problem is the doctors MISSED the DIAGNOSIS, that’s a medical error, not a ‘legal’ or ‘political’ problem.
The ‘free press’ in this society is so warped and controlled they can’t even tell this simple medical story correctly.
It is fodder for weak minded people who see this as a threat.
Of course, we don’t have any people like that who post or read things that type on Free Republic in order to produce a feeling angst.
We would never do that intentionally to people here.
Such a lie.
Trump needs to round up women who were coerced into a botched abortion. Also, many of the de-transitioners.
Don’t believe it.
Sounds like Princess Amanda is having dreams about murdering babies again.
There was a trend about twenty years ago of closing metro ER facilities as most of the no-pay patients came through the ER and the hospitals couldn’t afford the costs.
Total B.S.
I remember the early 1960s and the Thalidomide reports out of England while the US news ate it up!
One American woman had taken Thalidomide while in England and we got lots of pity party news reports about her and her need for an abortion. Everything from pro-abortion articles to pitiful photos of her! She finally got an abortion in Sweden. The reports said the fetus was deformed but no photos or proofs were ever published.
The left .... who could care less if a baby lives, or, dies .... how ironic.
Also ... learn to read MSM Bea Ess ... dozens means 1 or 2, at most.
The larger issue is whether medical providers interpret restrictive abortion laws as limiting their ability to treat patients who present with ectopic pregnancies, which can be life-threatening.
How providers respond could depend on how “abortion” is defined under state laws.
Medical v. legal definitions of ‘abortion’
The definition of an abortion varies depending on the medical source or expert consulted. Legal scholars tend to approach the matter differently than those in the medical community — the patient’s intent to terminate is key in this discussion.
The National Institutes of Health defines an abortion as a procedure “to end a pregnancy.”
Harvard Medical School describes it as a “removal of pregnancy tissue, products of conception or the fetus and placenta (afterbirth) from the uterus.” Harvard clarifies that other terms for abortion include “elective abortion, induced abortion, termination of pregnancy and therapeutic abortion.”
The Mayo Clinic specifies the treatment for an ectopic pregnancy is not a medical abortion, which it defines as “a procedure that uses medication to end a pregnancy.” It adds that a medical abortion can be used “to complete an early miscarriage or end an unwanted pregnancy.” When it comes to legal definition, however, what constitutes an “abortion” is often dictated in part by whether the patient made a conscious decision to terminate the pregnancy.
According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School an “abortion is the intentional termination of a pregnancy.”
Abortion laws across the states have used similar definitions. An Ohio law includes “the purposeful termination of a human pregnancy by any person.” A law in North Dakota defines it as “the use or prescription of any substance, device, instrument, medicine, or drug to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of an individual known to be pregnant.” Most of the medical experts we talked to were clear that they don’t consider ectopic treatment an abortion.
The lack of consensus over the definition for an abortion makes defining the treatment for an ectopic pregnancy confusing and it can have real-world implications.
“I think the reason this is coming up right now is because of the vague wording of so many of these laws, and I think that is what the general public and clinicians and lawyers are all kind of grappling with,”Addante said. “As a doctor, I would not, before a week ago, have considered the treatment of an ectopic pregnancy to be an abortion.”
All of the 18 states expected to ban abortion following the overturning of Roe v. Wade have exceptions for the life of the patient or a medical emergency. Even so, experts say the vagueness of these laws could lead to complications with access to treatment for ectopic pregnancies.
“These laws will have a chilling effect on clinicians, because they don’t want to be accused of committing a crime,” said Daniel Grossman, a professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at University of California San Francisco. “They may wait until the clinical presentation evolves to the point where it’s really clear that the person’s life is at risk, for example, waiting until the fallopian tube may have ruptured before intervening. That would be very bad medical care.”
The New England Journal of Medicine reports that this has already been the case for health care providers in Texas, where a restrictive abortion law, with an exception for the life of the mother, went into effect in September 2021.
Most pregnancy-related care is extremely time-sensitive, especially when it comes to treating an ectopic pregnancy.
“When people are unclear about what these laws mean, and you’re talking large penalties for physicians, you know, loss of license, jail time, felony charges,” Addante said. “The delays that are occurring as they seek legal clarity to make sure that they can legally do what they know to be medically right, it’s really dangerous for that patient.”
Doctors need to know that they won’t suffer repercussions when they provide what has always been considered a basic and acknowledged standard of medical care.
The standard of care is a benchmark used in medicine to determine whether the professional obligations to patients have been met by a healthcare provider. Failure to deliver the standard of care may be deemed medical negligence.
Standard of care is a legal term—not a medical one—defined by law and regulated by state administrative agencies. The laws governing the standard of care can vary by state. If the standard of care is not met, a patient can file for medical malpractice and seek damages in court.
It can be argued that pro-life states, by enacting vague and poorly written statutes, have given the pro-abortion side more - and better - ammunition.
The take-away for the average person who reads the AP article is going to be that abortion bans are too restrictive, and that they compromise the quality of care for pregnant women. Whether they actually do isn’t the issue. The perception is what people will remember.