Emergency rooms refused to treat pregnant women, leaving one to miscarry in a lobby restroom ( apnews.com )

One woman miscarried in the restroom lobby of a Texas emergency room as front desk staff refused to admit her. Another woman learned that her fetus had no heartbeat at a Florida hospital, the day after a security guard turned her away from the facility. And in North Carolina, a woman gave birth in a car after an emergency room couldnā€™t offer an ultrasound. The baby later died.

The cases raise alarms about the state of emergency pregnancy care in the U.S., especially in states that enacted strict abortion laws and sparked confusion around the treatment doctors can provide.

ā€œIt is shocking, itā€™s absolutely shocking,ā€ said Amelia Huntsberger, an OB/GYN in Oregon. ā€œIt is appalling that someone would show up to an emergency room and not receive care ā€“ this is inconceivable.ā€

Itā€™s happened despite federal mandates that the women be treated.

in4aPenny ,

$36 Trillion.

www.imf.org/ā€¦/tackling-global-tax-havens-shaxon

febra ,

Canā€™t really afford healthcare to save your own kids when you gotta send money over to Israel to kill someone elseā€™s

KillingTimeItself ,

you didnā€™t hear it from me, but, so far, no has said that you canā€™t miscarriage in public.

So, for the two people that would ever want to do that. Have at it.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

See? Now that abortion is illegal, if you and your fetus die, thatā€™s the way God intended it to be!

Every life is precious and abortion is murderā€¦ unless God thinks otherwise, then abort that little fucker, God, and kill the lady for good measure!

Nelots ,
@Nelots@lemm.ee avatar

Every life* is precious.

*Not including the lives of pregnant women.

toiletobserver ,

Solution: stop fucking conservatives

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Lysistrataā€™s solution only works if everyone agrees. Sadly, there are a lot of conservative women.

Burn_The_Right ,

Conservatives often breed like cockroaches. They take pride in how many children they produce, impoverished or not. And too often, neglecting their children is just seen as a way to ā€œtoughen 'em upā€.

Source: Am from the conservative south.

Phegan ,

This is America

TheControlled ,

Huh. Those were the exact words that popped in my head while reading the article.

Smoogs ,

I was half expecting to see that this was in fact in America. this probably wouldnā€™t happen as flamboyantly in any other country with a barely functioning health care system

rambling_lunatic ,

I donā€™t quite understand. How did banning abortions lead to doctors being scared of helping people give birth?

melpomenesclevage ,

because if they fuck up at all, which happens, or something unforseen happens (which, yeah), theyā€™re liable. legally.

rambling_lunatic ,

Damn. That is utterly insane.

melpomenesclevage ,

no its perfectly sane in the context of capitalism.

which is sane. legally, according to the dsm and icd.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

Because the state rules often arenā€™t clear on what Drs can/cannot do, so theyā€™re scared of being arrested and charged.

Khanzarate ,

If they accept the patient, and the patient needs an emergency abortion, then they could face legal consequences for providing one, or face losing their license for denying critical care.

Either way, if such a circumstance happens, the doctor is completely fucked, and theyā€™d rather keep their job, and help other people.

Thereā€™s confusion about what is and isnā€™t allowed, which isnā€™t helping. Doctors donā€™t know what they could be sued for. Its in their best interest to not see patients like this. Doctors need protections at least, but governments have specifically taken steps to make them liable, and this confusion and refusal is part of the plan to make abortions this scary thing.

rambling_lunatic ,

I live in a country where all abortions are banned. This sort of thing doesnā€™t happen here. Do you know why that could be? Time?

FlowVoid ,

In the US, abortions are legal in some states and severely punished in other states. As a result, OB/GYN doctors have been physically moving en masse from the latter states to the former states.

This has left the latter states with an acute shortage of OB/GYNs. And if a hospital does not have an OB/GYN who can treat a patient, they will not admit an OB/GYN patient to the hospital.

rambling_lunatic ,

But doesnā€™t the article say that there were doctors, but that they refused to perform their job?

Beebabe ,
@Beebabe@lemmy.world avatar

In some states you have to be in the process of ā€œlife at riskā€ before treatment now, or the doctor could be jailed. Lots of articles about this, women nearly dying, losing their reproductive organs, etc. Itā€™s all very dehumanizing.

FlowVoid ,

The article says that ER doctors wouldnā€™t perform jobs that required OB/GYN training.

SkyezOpen ,

Because women that need abortions donā€™t go to regular doctors.

rambling_lunatic ,

Well they donā€™t do that in Texas either, do they?

Sam_Bass ,

They are threatened to be held responsible and imprisoned for helping a woman abort

rambling_lunatic ,

In my country medical professionals that help induce an abortion can be imprisoned for 4-10 years. Nonetheless, the thing described in the article doesnā€™t happen. It must be something else.

Sam_Bass , (edited )

Well what i described is whats here on texas. Dipshit legislator capital of the u.s.

rambling_lunatic ,

It has some serious competition.

Fuckfuckmyfuckingass ,
@Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world avatar

Iā€™m assuming it because the legal liabilities are unknowns at this point and nobody wants to take the plunge to find out. The US ā€œJusticeā€ system is pretty fucked to say the least.

rambling_lunatic ,

Yeah that makes sense.

orcrist ,

And in your country I presume the law applies to the entire country, doesnā€™t vary by state, and wasnā€™t put into effect in very recent history.

After 10 or 20 years there will be enough legal precedent in each state that doctors and hospitals can formulate policies which will probably keep them safe from prosecution. Right now, they donā€™t have that capability, because everything is so new. And the only way to find out whether their actions are legal is to try them and see if they get charged and see what the courts say.

Itā€™s important to keep in mind that the states with strict laws against abortion are run by Republicans who really donā€™t care about the doctors or the women. Itā€™s not like the laws are perfectly crafted to guarantee that patients receive the best possible medical care.

rambling_lunatic ,

In that case, do you expect these cases to go away with time? Ideally, abortion becomes legal again, but if it doesnā€™t will time make things at least a little better?

Drivebyhaiku , (edited )

Itā€™s a major issue with laws when they intermingle with medical practice. Laws are kind of like bad computer code. It is written with an intention but that intention is only as good as how good your technical ability to write the code is which also hinges on understanding what all the potentially the factors at play are. Particularly when your law has particularly harsh penalties for misconduct.

Human bodies are complicated and a lot of law regarding operates in the space of ā€œpotentialā€. In a court of law in things like self defense cases where you have to defend your actions from persecution by the code have to prove you had no other ā€œpotentialā€ avenues to take because if it can be proven you had other choices or there is a chance however small that you overreacted and things theoretically could have turned out fine the law swoops in and leaves you open to prosecution.

But medical stuff is complicated and nuanced in ways the law is not. Law is a rigid computer code. If you have a situation leaves an opening in the law for ā€œcases that are life threatening.ā€ and someone does the thing they then leave themselves open to the potential of having to prove that every single other option was exhausted. If someone is stable and not in immediate distressā€¦ Even though you know they will be later given predictable odds it becomes a nightmare of leaving more doubt so one tactic is to just wait until things are life threateningā€¦ But the problem with life threatening cases is they hold extra damages and risks. If your life is in danger your organs are failing. There is no question the house is burning down when the flames burst through the windows but if you wanted to mitigate the damages putting it out when the candle first tipped over has the best long term results ā€¦

Say a law stipulates that itā€™s only permissible to help in the event the house is ā€œburning downā€. This means you have to agree in a court room that your definition of ā€œburning downā€ is in fact a reasonable interpretation of that specific language. One tactic to be safe is you wait until nobody can argue the state of the house. Would you say a little spot of your carpet being on fire is the house ā€œburning downā€? Itā€™s not good sure but isnā€™t that hyperbole? What constitutes ā€œburning downā€ anyway? So your carpet burning isnā€™t the house burning down and thereā€™s no provision for the the drapes and furniture, or an oil or oven fireā€¦ Those are all not causing damage directly to the structure of the house so the house isnā€™t even burning much less ā€œdownā€ā€¦ But if you wait the house will catch fireā€¦ But is it ā€œburning downā€? Itā€™s when the structure of your house is in danger of collapsing right? Down still implies a fire where the house is pretty advanced and there isnā€™t much left afterwards right? At what point is the house actually ā€œburning downā€? When the structure catches probably isnā€™t burning ā€œdownā€ is it when 25% of the structure ia compromised? If you put out the fire then the house wouldnā€™t be ā€œdownā€ would it? Still a lot of house that is in fact ā€œupā€. Well 50% is probably a good call right? Oh but then itā€™s only " in imminent danger of burning down" not actively ā€œburning downā€ ā€¦

Laws like anti abortion laws tend to be created to be big and showy and easy for lay people to read because they are essentially political showboating. Every place with a total abortion ban has shown to be terrible for womenā€™s healthcare in exactly this way and none of this outcome was a surprise to the people fighting to keep abortion legal.

rambling_lunatic ,

Thanks! Your reply is what finally made me fully ā€œget itā€.

The states mention in the article say that you can only abort if the motherā€™s health is in danger, or in the cases of rape and incest. If youā€™re treating a pregnant woman and sheā€™s in critical condition, you might be faced with having to do an abortion. If you do it, the courts might say the woman wasnā€™t in enough danger. If you donā€™t, the courts might say you caused the patientā€™s death.

Where I live, abortion is 100% banned (hooray for Catholicism). In some other comments in this chain, I asked why that might now happen here.

This is why. To hell if your house is burning, you are not allowed to put it out. Therefore this choice doesnā€™t happen and the gynecologists just do their job, or at least try to.

Cyberflunk ,

Welcome to pre-Gilliad

Socsa ,

No, itā€™s not fucking shocking. Itā€™s an extremely predictable consequence of religious zealotry legislating their sick version of morality.

Quexotic ,

It is definitely not inconceivable. It is exceptionally conceivable. It is predictable as you said. If you outlaw proper maternal care, proper maternal care will not be given.

As a friend of mine always says, the cruelty is the point.

lanolinoil ,
@lanolinoil@lemmy.world avatar

They should charge the doctor on duty and admins with a crime for that one in Houston ā€“ That is massively fucked up. They should have their licenses removed too absolutely unbelievable

ElmerFudd ,

Republican politicians are responsible for this, nobody else.

lanolinoil ,
@lanolinoil@lemmy.world avatar

Yeah I donā€™t care about the law if I was in charge of a hospital a woman isnā€™t giving birth in the lobby bathroom after being turned away. Fuck the politicians too though

Carlo ,

The people voting for those politicians also bear the responsibility.

wahming ,

So fuck the doctors, because theyā€™re damned if they do, damned if they donā€™t?

linearchaos ,
@linearchaos@lemmy.world avatar

Go ahead and do that then you donā€™t have any doctors. Just shut down all the hospitals in Texas you donā€™t need them. Thoughts and prayers.

radiant_bloom ,

So abortion being legal actually saves lives ? You donā€™t say !

I swear, the fact they call themselves ā€œpro-lifeā€ while sowing death and misery is completely unacceptable. Itā€™s like them calling themselves ā€œconservativeā€ while destroying nature and societyā€¦

MrFappy ,

Or calling themselves ā€œChristianā€ while spreading more hate than any other group on earth.

UnfortunateShort ,

Pacifism is a core value for protestant Christians, as it was preached by Jesus himself. Which goes to show you how many people just use their on-paper religion as an excuse for whatever bullshit.

melpomenesclevage ,

this was pacifist though. it just got someone killed.

Killer ,

Yea because of an active change.

melpomenesclevage ,

so is removing safety rails.

you can absolutely execute a pacifist genocide, if you have enough control.

JasonDJ ,

Are you implying the doctors are pacifists here?

Pacifism: a person who believes that war and violence are unjustifiable.

I suppose that implies, then, that the pro-lifers are the pacifists here, though they only really consider violence against the fetus, and not the violence of oppressing the mothers (through use of force when they dare use their bodily autonomy or trust doctors to use gasp science and medicine instead of select excerpts from an old anthology of fables).

The doctors here are really in a bind. They cannot practice medicine without fear of legal repercussions. They are put into trolley problems where flicking the switch has a significant chance of also teleporting them onto the other track, multiple times a day. The only way they can guarantee their own safety (and license, and livelyhood, and that of their family) is through inaction, not pacifism.

melpomenesclevage ,

Iā€™m not saying its good. Iā€™m saying this is evil pacifism.

melpomenesclevage ,

that tracks. you ever met a christian who did anything else?

theyā€™re weird and know theyā€™re weird and donā€™t call themselves that.

IamSparticles ,

ā€œIt is appalling that someone would show up to an emergency room and not receive care ā€“ this is inconceivable.ā€

You keep using that wordā€¦ I do not think it means what you think it means. This was all predicted as potential outcomes from overturning Roe. Itā€™s not even the first time, because this is what things were like before Roe. You know that quote? ā€œThose who donā€™t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.ā€ I used to think it was kind of clichĆ©, but it seems to be more and more relevant all the time these days.

mosiacmango , (edited )

This is an OB/GYN in a different state reviewing the cases at a medical level. You can be 100% sure she knows why they are occurring :

For Huntsberger, the OB-GYN, EMTALA was one of the few ways she felt protected to treat pregnant patients in Idaho, despite the stateā€™s abortion ban. She left Idaho last year to practice in Oregon because of the ban.

What she is saying that it is absolutely shocking that these woman, in deep medical need, were turned away because of cruel and pandering state laws.

Shes making it clear that medically, these hospitals broke their hippocratic oath in order to comply with these heartless state laws while also violating federal law that requires them to provide medical care to those in need.

IamSparticles ,

Oh, I know all that. I still think ā€œinconceivableā€ is the wrong choice of word. ā€œMonstrousā€ is good. ā€œHorrifyingā€ works. Even ā€œHeartbreakingā€, though thatā€™s maybe a little soft. Unfortunately, itā€™s all too conceivable.

IzzyScissor ,

Corollary: Those preventing history from being taught intend to repeat it.

BertramDitore ,
@BertramDitore@lemmy.world avatar

Why the hell are security guards and front desk staff making medical decisions? Iā€™m sure their jobs arenā€™t easy, but this isnā€™t their job.

tsonfeir ,
@tsonfeir@lemm.ee avatar

Because Texas wombs are controlled by men.

Shou ,

Men

wahming ,

You have a funny way of spelling Republicans

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

Seeing as the average in the House and Senate is 72% male, ā€œmenā€ works.

pewresearch.org/ā€¦/118th-congress-has-a-record-numā€¦

_tezz ,

Lots of these men are Democrats and of course do not support this evil nonsense. Itā€™s Republicans, dog

Shou ,

I get its sexist. But the majority who wanted this anti abortion bill were men. Not only that, controlling female reproduction is the norm for primates and men have shown the same desire time and time again. So yeah, men.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

One of the reasons, I presume, is the same reason why some older black people in the south donā€™t have a birth certificate (and thus now canā€™t get a voter ID). ā€œWe donā€™t let your kind in here.ā€

ME5SENGER_24 ,

Charge the hospital administration with Gross Negligence, Manslaughter and any other charges that will apply and correct this trend. Healthcare isnā€™t a privilege, itā€™s a basic human right and access to it should not be denied

henfredemars ,

Those charges sure are an improvement over murder in the event the actions of you or your staff could be interpreted as an abortion.

I have no love for hospital administration or their treatment of employees and patients, but itā€™s an disturbing position with few good answers.

ImADifferentBird ,
@ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

The problem is, theyā€™re already in a position where they can get charged if they do treat these women, and end up having to do something the anti-abortion assholes donā€™t approve of.

Charging them for not treating the women puts them in a ā€œdamned if they do, damned if they donā€™tā€ situation where the only logical course of action is to shut down the hospital and leave the state.

Corkyskog ,

And complete hospital closure is the only thing that will change some peopleā€™s minds.

xePBMg9 ,

Isnā€™t this a question of, damned if you do; damned if you donā€™t? Provide care and you go to jail. Donā€™t provide care and the woman dies. Medical professionals are not there to sacrifice themselves. If you make it impossible for them to provide care, they will just not do that. I know I would look for another job if that was me.

Corkyskog ,

Itā€™s federal law, they must provide care for people pregnant if they want fed funds.

Scubus ,

Itā€™s state law, if the baby dies they could be held accountable.

Corkyskog ,

Thatā€™s fine. But if they want to abide by their state laws then they lose Medicare funding and the hospital shuts down.

FlowVoid ,

The Houston clinic in the article has already stopped taking Medicare patients.

Socsa ,

Hospital administration? How about we sue every backwards asshole who supports this unholy philosophy and make them pay for their consequences in real dollars an cents. Weā€™ll see how closely held their values truly are pretty quickly.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

It wonā€™t bring their babies back, but these sure sound like some slam dunk lawsuits

henfredemars ,

Federal law requires emergency rooms to treat or stabilize patients who are in active labor and provide a medical transfer to another hospital if they donā€™t have the staff or resources to treat them. Medical facilities must comply with the law if they accept Medicare funding. The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday that could weaken those protections.

Letā€™s see how long that lasts.

Plus, the effect and point of many of these laws is to create massive liability to make pregnant patients untouchables. Running an OBGYN dept is becoming an unacceptable legal risk.

All is working as intended to harm women.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday that could weaken those protections.

And thatā€™s the crux of this whole fucking issue. The orange asshole got elected and weaseled in his judges to tip the balance of the highest court in America.

Just think what else heā€™ll do if heā€™s elected again.

roguetrick ,

I donā€™t even understand what legal justification the SCOTUS could use to hamper the EMTALA. They would be wildly legislating from the bench to do so.

ImADifferentBird ,
@ImADifferentBird@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Like that ever stops them.

capem ,

Blame everyone who nominated hillary over Bernie :(

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • ā€¢
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • tech
  • kbinEarth
  • testing
  • interstellar
  • wanderlust
  • All magazines
    •