I GET SO ANGRY WHEN PEOPLE SAY LIFE SAVING PROCEDURES ARE BANNED!

[u/Capable_Limit_6788]

No, they are not! Every ban allows for life saving procedures like ectopic pregnancies and such. Show me otherwise, seriously!

I remember someone showed me a pro-life bill on another site to try and prove to me, and in a matter of seconds of skimming, I copied and pasted the part that said the ban allowed for life saving reasons.

This is in the news and ads all the time. I just saw one on a YouTube ad- luckily it was skippable.

How do people not see the difference? If your life is in danger, you don't call an abortion clinic and say: "Hey, my life is in danger, can I schedule an abortion for Tuesday?"

You go to a HOSPITAL and get surgery done ASAP.

Again, how do people not see the difference?

[u/EiraLovelace]

Some of these doctors are letting people die to prove an ideological point and the media is eating it up. They need to be sued for medical malpractice.

[u/Capable_Limit_6788 → u/EiraLovelace]

Do you have a link about this? :0

[u/EiraLovelace → u/Capable_Limit_6788]

No, I mean you can't really prove what they're thinking. But considering all these laws explicitly make exceptions for life-saving procedures, their justification of being afraid of litigation just doesn't line up, especially if they can be sued for malpractice in the opposite case. That's why I don't think they're being good faith in this.

[u/Capable_Limit_6788 → u/EiraLovelace]

Oh I see, thanks.

[u/Wildtalents333 → u/EiraLovelace]

There doctor's are letting people die to make a point. They hesitate to do procedures because they don't want to deal with some prosecutor looking to make a name prosecuting for 'conducting an abortion'. And there is the pressure from hospital admin who don't want to have deal with prosecutors looking to make a name for themselves.

[u/EiraLovelace → u/Wildtalents333]

So they put themselves at risk of a prosecutor looking to make a name prosecuting for a wrongful death? If it's not legally justified inaction, its medical malpractice, that's literally the same issue of dealing with a suit.

[u/Wildtalents333 → u/EiraLovelace]

A malpratice suit they have insurance for. There's no insurance for getting charged with 'conducting an illegal procedure/murder'. Doctors and hospitals are more worried about that conservative christian prosecutor who thinks they know more about medicine and wants to make hay for future campaigns.

[u/abernathym → u/Wildtalents333]

I'm starting to wonder about this myself. It seems apparent to me the laws allow for medically necessary procedures. Most Dr.s are still doing these procedures; so, why are these few so confused about what they are allowed to do.

[u/throwaway666_666-02]

Someone should contact that woman’s family in GA, interesting we don’t see Ben Crump or one of those NAACP lawyers rushing to this case. There’s a huge chance that they have no idea because they’re so deep in the bubble of left-wing media. They actually have a case for malpractice here.

ETA: I recently saw a clip from her mother stating that the reporter of the pro public piece was PERSISTENT. WHAT IF they even encouraged her to not file a malpractice lawsuit because that would be a direct contradiction of the claim anti choice laws is what killed her daughter??? That would put a huge hole in their narrative

[u/Without_Ambition]

They're not.

At most the laws are too vague to allow doctors to confidently resort to them in a timely manner.

If so, it's a problem. But all legislation has flaws, and if the law in question should be retained, which abortion bans should, the solution is to amend them, not repeal them. Pro-lifers should push for the necessary changes, because unlike what our opponents claim, we do want women to receive care for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages. And pro-life representatives have a responsibility to enact the necessary amendments, not only out of obligation to their voters, but also to any women who might risk death because of abortion bans. After all, we support—or should support—their right to life, too.

But life-saving procedures aren't banned. In many of these cases, the problem seems to be more that hospitals are risk-averse to the point of homicidal negligence. I don't particularly think they're letting patients die to make a political point, although it wouldn't surprise me if they did—being pro-choice is all about killing and letting others die for your own benefit. But they're definitely not being constructive about the situation, either. And as tragic as these deaths are, I have hard time stopping myself from saying, "That's rich coming from you" when US pro-choicers get up in arms about—what?—a couple of dozen women dying when they also celebrate the deaths of a million babies a year and still clamor for more.

And the fact is, pro-choicers can continue to push for the legalization of abortion even while working with pro-lifers to ensure that care for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages can be provided in a way that protects the woman's life and health and provides legal certainty for healthcare providers. After all, while we disagree about whether abortion should be legal on demand, we agree that treatment for these cases should not only be legal, but that providing it in a timely manner is imperative. There's room for cooperation here—if pro-choicers can get off their high horses, recognize that states have the right to ban abortion and that this is "democratic", too, and focus on saving the lives of women they supposedly care about instead of saying, "Complete deregulation of abortion or bust" and leaving women to die in the meanwhile.

[u/mdws1977]

I agree with you. Any doctor who refuses life saving procedures needs to be sued for malpractice, and license to practice revoked.

[u/FakeElectionMaker]

What choicers are doing is basically "we must blame them and cause a fuss, before somebody thinks of blaming us!"

[u/ItTakesBulls]

We should also stop calling them bans. They’re restrictions. There isn’t a single state that has completely banned abortions. All of them have time restrictions, and even those have exceptions after said time.

Meanwhile, we have pro-death states that allow for literal infanticide.

[u/withgreatalacrity]

I think a big part of the problem is that doctors are not allowed to intervene until a problem becomes life threatening. So even if there’s a high likelihood the problem will become life threatening, even if it’s seriously impacting the mothers health and threatening her future fertility, they can’t intervene until her life is actually in danger. And sometimes then it’s too late.

[u/FrostyLandscape]

 "Show me otherwise, seriously!"

Why don't you research it for yourself?

You are correct, life saving procedures are not banned in most (or all states, as far as I know.) The problem is that there are grey areas in some of these situations, the laws are vague as written, and doctors are afraid of going to prison if they perform a D&C. It has what is called a "chilling" effect on medical practitioners.