Posted on 09/18/2021 7:08:44 PM PDT by American Number 181269513
A Texas doctor has revealed that he recently performed an abortion in violation of the state's new controversial law that prohibits nearly all abortions after roughly six weeks into a pregnancy, arguing that he “had a duty of care to this patient.”
Alan Braid, a San Antonio-based physician, wrote in an op-ed published by The Washington Post Saturday that on Sept. 6, just five days after the Texas abortion ban went into effect, that he “provided an abortion to a woman who, though still in her first trimester, was beyond the state’s new limit.”
Braid, who began his obstetrics and gynecology residency at a San Antonio hospital in 1972, said that during the year before abortion was recognized as a constitutional right in the 1973 landmark Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, he saw “three teenagers die from illegal abortions.”
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this month not to block Texas’ new abortion law, Braid wrote, “For me, it is 1972 all over again.”
The doctor said that he had been a practicing OB/GYN for more than four decades, "conducting Pap smears, pelvic exams and pregnancy check-ups; delivering more than 10,000 babies; and providing abortion care at clinics I opened in Houston and San Antonio, and another in Oklahoma.”
He went on to say that the new Texas law, known as S.B. 8, “shut down about 80 percent of the abortion services we provide.”
The so-called “fetal heartbeat” law in Texas bans all abortions after cardiac activity is detected, which can occur as early as six weeks into a pregnancy, before many people know they are pregnant.
While the law provides exceptions in medical emergencies, it does not for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, and also allows virtually any private citizen to file a lawsuit against a person who has performed or aided in the performance of an abortion procedure.
Individuals who take legal action have the opportunity to win $10,000 for successful lawsuits.
Braid wrote Saturday that while he “fully understood that there could be legal consequences” for his decision, he “wanted to make sure that Texas didn’t get away with its bid to prevent this blatantly unconstitutional law from being tested.”
The doctor, who noted that his clinics are among the plaintiffs represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights in the federal lawsuit aimed at stopping the Texas abortion ban, added that he believes “abortion is an essential part of health care.”
“I have spent the past 50 years treating and helping patients,” he continued. “I can’t just sit back and watch us return to 1972.”
The Biden administration has already committed to fighting the Texas law, with the Department of Justice filing a motion this week requesting either a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order that would prevent the ban from going into effect.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said Friday that it would be taking action to protect patients and abortion providers in Texas, including by giving up to $10 million in grants for clinics who have seen an increase in demand following the implementation of the law.
The law will be enforced. It is dependent upon a suit brought by someone other than the state government.
You are correct.
See here for the BS if you can tolerate it.
Fundamental Right’: Defiant Texas Doctor Goes Public About Abortion He Provided
At least they didn’t provide IVM /sarcasm
There is no criminal penalty. He has to be sued by a citizen.
There is no criminal penalty.
How barbaric is the claim that an abortion is a “medical” procedure. It certainly violates the Hippocratic Oath that demands that a physician “do no harm”.
He holds Satan higher than Texas Law. An evil man.
That “doctor” should be hung by the neck until dead. ANYONE committing abortion or contracting to have it performed is a murderer.
Twisted
They took the “do no harm” part out of the duty of physicians?
This is the best example of a "feel good, do nothing" law that I can think of.
But don't criticize it or people will cal you "pro-baby killer."
It's a stupid law and it's going to bite conservatives in their asses.
I remember that useless bastard. I was so glad to finally see someone brought him to justice at church of all places. To this day I consider the shooter a hero a selfless hero at that.
Wait before you conclude this. Another case is pending in GA. This one goes directly to the source of the evil. It will be hard fought.
"NY Man Enters Diner Without Mask, Nation Outraged"
A duty of care? Was this woman’s life in danger to the point that the only care option was an abortion?
More like a duty of care to his bank account and to his sociopathy/psychopathy.
“Is he getting his license revoked?”
Your post made me think. Has any state approached restricting abortion by revoking the licenses of physicians who perform them? It would seem to be within the purview of a state’s right to regulate the practice of medicine within its borders, but I don’t recall ever reading about any state trying that approach.
It’s worse than that, if you read the statute. It makes a mockery of the standing doctrine, provides for one-way fee shifting, allows blatant forum-shopping, denies constitutional protections for the accused (make no mistake, they can call it “damages” but it is plainly a criminal fine), prohibits sanctions for frivolous lawsuits, and requires those challenging the statute’s constitutionality to pay the government’s attorney fees. It is an abuse of state power written by a lawyer who probably thought he came up with a clever way to evade judicial review. In that, it has been moderately successful, but that will only last until someone is actually sued under the statute. At that point, the suit will ultimately be dismissed for lack of constitutional standing under the Texas constitution.
Abortion should be illegal. The way to do it is to make it a crime and then push for Roe to be overturned.
Texas and Louisiana tried a similar regulatory approach by requiring doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals. The Supreme Court held, in 2016 and 2020, both states’ laws unconstitutionally burdened the right to an abortion. It is impossible to see how revoking the licenses of abortion doctors would not be unconstitutional for the same reason, if those cases are followed.
Both cases were 5-4. In 2016, Kennedy joined the liberals in the majority. In 2020, after Kavanaugh jointed the court but before Ginsburg died, Roberts gave the liberals their fifth vote by concurring in the judgment, even though he dissented in the Texas case, based purely on stare decisis.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.