Eight women across three states — Idaho, Tennessee and Oklahoma — have filed legal actions to ensure that pregnant people with dangerous complications can access abortion care in those states.
“The Supreme Court’s unwarranted reversal of Roe v. Wade has led repeatedly, in multiple states, to women being denied abortion care when they face serious complications in their pregnancies,” Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement. “No one should have to be at death’s door to receive essential health care, but that is exactly what happens when doctors are forced to practice medicine under threat of imprisonment.”
Abortion bans in these states include exceptions for pregnant people who are experiencing medical emergencies. But the bans use ambiguous language and non-medical terminology, leaving doctors unsure how sick or near death a patient must be before legally meeting the “medical emergency” standard.
Because health care professionals in violation of the bans face prison time, hefty fines, and/ or loss of licensure, doctors are hesitant to provide abortions in life-threatening circumstances — and many pregnant people with complications have been refused abortion care in these states.
“Abortion bans across the nation are exposing pregnant people to risks of death, illness, and injury, including loss of fertility,” Northup said. “The women standing up today survived, but it is only a matter of time before someone does not.”
Abortion bans in Idaho and Tennessee do not make exceptions for pregnancies in which the fetus has a fatal condition and will not survive — a circumstance that can pose a grave threat to a pregnant person’s health. Nicole Blackmon, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against Tennessee, was forced to carry a nonviable pregnancy for months.
“I was in terrible pain and could even have had a stroke and died, but I could not afford to travel out of state for an abortion,” Blackmon said in a statement. “I was condemned to endure both physical and emotional torture, knowing that I was going to deliver a stillborn.”
Another plaintiff in the case, Jennifer Adkins, was forced to scramble to come up with funds to travel for abortion care after learning that her pregnancy was likely nonviable and that her life was in danger.
“I knew right away that I needed an abortion to save my life and to make sure that I was here and healthy for my family, including my now 2-year-old son,” Adkins said. “But the fact that I couldn’t get the abortion care I urgently needed in Idaho just added to our misery.”
Federal law requires that health care professionals offer necessary emergency care to patients, including abortions. But Jaci Statton, a plaintiff in the case against Oklahoma, was refused an abortion even when her pregnancy became life-threatening. Statton later filed a federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) complaint alleging that she was illegally refused care.
“Oklahoma’s laws nearly killed me,” Statton said. “I ended up having to travel almost 200 miles out of state for care — it was the longest and most terrifying ride of my life.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.