Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Roe v. Wade.

missy said:
"

from Bloomberg dot com
​

Traveling for abortions​

Earlier this month, the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights organization, released data showing how the number of abortions performed in each state has changed since 2020.
Since Roe v. Wade was overturned last year, abortion has become completely illegal in 14 states, according to the organization. Access is limited, to varying degrees, in most other states.
If it’s difficult or impossible to get an abortion at home, that might mean people have to travel elsewhere to get the care they need. And data from the Guttmacher Institute suggests a lot of people are traveling to one state in particular: New Mexico. The state saw a 220% increase in abortions from 2020 through this year.
Andrea Miller, president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, broke it down for me. New Mexico, she explained, is close to a lot of states where abortion is largely illegal — like Texas and Oklahoma. It’s also close to states where it’s challenging to obtain one, like Arizona. As those states made it more difficult to get abortions, New Mexico made it easier, she says.
“It certainly has long been understood as being a place where people can go to access equitable, just and available care,” Miller says.
Miller says this trend applied to other states as well. Illinois, for example, passed abortion rights legislation in 2019 and enacted a shield law in 2023that protected abortion providers and patients from out-of-state legal harm. From 2020 to 2023, the state saw a 69% increase in abortions, or about 18,300 more cases.
New Mexico has also been getting more abortion providers, according to Kayla Herring, the New Mexico public affairs director for Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, the local affiliate of the national organization. In fact, Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Mississippi clinic at the heart of the US Supreme Court case that overturned Roe v. Wade, relocated to New Mexico last year.
Since last June, 56% of abortions in New Mexico were for people traveling from other states, Herring says.
“We recently had a patient who drove 17 hours, roundtrip,” Herring says. “She couldn’t tell her family where she was going. She actually left her cell phone at home for fear of being tracked.”
“We’re really watching a public health crisis in the making,” she says. — Ike Swetlitz
"
Click to expand...

New Republican restrictions on women: https://www.meidastouch.com/news/texas-republicans-pass-laws-limiting-travel-of-pregnant-women

Key Points:

"A similar law was passed earlier this year in Idaho to prevent women from traveling to abortion-legal Washington State, effectively creating hard borders between states for women, furthering the drive by Republicans to make women second-class citizens in the United States."

"Even driving a pregnant woman to the post office could lead to legal action as the suit could allege the woman was receiving the abortion pill in the mail."

"These laws are obviously unenforceable, as 99% of abortions occur in the early weeks of pregnancy when a women is not visibly pregnant. So either these states just intend these ordinances to act as intimidation, or they plan on limiting the travel of ALL WOMEN on the off-chance that they may be pregnant. "

That's a big "or"... Scary.

I live in a "no abortion" state, and there has been talk here, too, about restricting women from crossing state lines. They just haven't figured out how to word a law so that it has enough teeth to really do what they want it to do.

Whether you're 10 or 100 (and especially if you are of child bearing age), this all should be a red flag about your current value to society as a female.
 
After the events of this week if I speak my mind I will be banned from Pricescope. When a person is saying they want abortion banned at 6 weeks and with the only exception for the physical life of the mother while not allowing exceptions for the psychological and emotional state of the mother pretty much tells me he does not give a damn if the pregnancy is due to rape or incest.
 
Last edited:
We are circling the drain in this country.

The hard earned rights and equalities for women, LGBTQ and minorities in this country are disappearing, rapidly.
Government restrictions on our bodies and our reproductive rights, criminalizing aspects of healthcare is not the role for government. Criminalization for crossing state borders to seek legal abortion? It’s shocking and scary how quickly fascism is taking hold. In the meantime, more mass shootings.

I too could go on, but like @Calliecake I’d also get booted off PS.
 
Last edited:
Bonfire said:
We are circling the drain in this country.

The hard earned rights and equalities for women, LGBTQ and minorities in this country are disappearing, rapidly.
Government restrictions on our bodies and our reproductive rights, criminalizing aspects of healthcare is not the role for government. Criminalization for crossing borders to seek legal abortion? It’s shocking and scary how quickly fascism is taking hold. In the meantime, more mass shootings.

I too could go on, but like @Calliecake I’d also get booted off PS.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, agree completely. I have a LOT to say but unfortunately we cannot speak freely here. On this topic and other topics. It's a shame because it would be nice to be able to discuss but hot topics are off limits :(
 
Was there ever an area where people could discuss these types of things? Perhaps one where it wasn't open to the public but only those who applied and committed to not being hateful to those with different opinions? I haven't been here long enough, or involved enough to know. I try to keep my mouth shut, a lot, because I don't want to lose access to the point of this site, but if there is going to a place where people could voice opinions separate from discussions about diamonds and gems I don't think it would poison the rest of the site. I guess the response would be that there are other places for those discussions, but honestly, I feel like I've got some camaraderie here and like these give and takes..Just my thoughts.
 
For those who are new, we used to allow politics. We also used to allow politics in members only forum. Nothing worked. No one could behave, we spent hours of time weekly monitoring fights, giving time outs, etc. It was then decided to stop allowing it because it wasn’t contributing anything positive to Pricescope.
 
"

Women fighting for their lives in the US​

Abortion, Texas, me, Kate, and the tragic story​

KATELYN JETELINA
DEC 12


I’m a mom who carried three pregnancies in Texas, one of whom had irreversible severe genetic abnormalities. This suddenly meant I was fighting for my life mid-pregnancy. And he didn’t have a fighting chance. And, although I came out on the other side, it’s not without incredible heartache and trauma. Maybe one day, I will have the courage to tell my whole story. But that’s what it is: my story, my health, and my life.

Kate Cox in Texas is experiencing an eerily similar story. But her health and future were not being determined by her. Nor her medical team. If she makes it out alive, she will have heartache and trauma for the rest of her life.

But this isn’t just a story about me or Kate. It’s a battle that hits close to home for many women in the U.S. Women are literally fighting for their lives.

Maternal mortality rates: High and increasing​

The number of women dying from pregnancy, childbirth, and soon after birth is tragically high. Compared to other high-income countries, the U.S. ranks highest. In fact, it is 20 times higher than the Netherlands.

​
Source: Commonwealth Fund, 2022. Annotated by YLE/Katelyn Jetelina
As dramatic as the overall U.S. statistic is, it masks even more tragic data stories:

  • Maternal mortality rates are rapidly increasing.
  • Disparities are jarring. Non-Hispanic Black women, for example, have a maternal mortality rate of 69.8 per 1000 live births.
​
(Source: CDC)

Restrictions to care play a role​

Maternal mortality in the U.S. is multifaceted: increased rate of c-sections, sociodemographic factors, poor prenatal care, chronic illness and increasing restrictions in health care options.

  • One study found reducing women’s access to family planning and reproductive health services have contributed to the most recent rise in maternal mortality rates.
  • Another found every 1-unit increase in the abortion policy index (i.e., more restrictive state-level policies) equated to a 7% increasein maternal mortality.
Both of these studies evaluated policies before Dobbs. Given the more restricted access to care now, maternal mortality are projected to be more dire:

​
Source here.

Long term consequences​

If the mother survives pregnancy and childbirth, the experience may impact her mental and physical health for decades to come.

“Maternal near misses”—defined as a woman who nearly died but survived a complication—are associated with:

  • worse overall quality of life,
  • worse mental and social health, and
  • negative economic consequences.
The same is true for women who wanted an abortion but got turned away. The famous Turnaway study (whose principal scientist was just granted a MacArthur Genius Award) found that those turned away experienced:

  • Larger increases in financial distress. This was sustained for several years.
​
Financial Outcomes Relative to Event Time, by Group. Source here.
  • Short-term reduction in credit access.
  • Greater anxiety and loss of self-esteem after being denied abortion.
  • Lower likelihood of aspirational life plans for the coming year.
  • Poorer physical health for years after the pregnancy, including chronic pain and gestational hypertension.
  • Serious implications for the children born of unwanted pregnancy, as well as for the existing children in the family.
  • Greater likelihood of staying tethered to abusive partners.

Bottom line​

Women are fighting for their lives in the United States. We see it in the statistics. We hear it in women’s stories. Our job as members of the community is to support them. The answer is not to make their fight harder. I hope we can all find a way to agree on that.

I’m forever grateful for Kate’s bravery. And all of the women out there fighting for the betterment of women’s health.
"
 
I’ve been following the Kate Cox story and all she has gone thru.
The fact that a woman’s life is was in jeopardy, her future fertility was in jeopardy, the pregnancy wasn’t viable and the state did nothing to help her shows exactly how woman are valued in that state.

I believe nothing will change until women actually die. When this happens I hope the people responsible for making these decisions are charged with murder and I hope they spend many years in prison.


@Ella, If I have crossed any lines, please remove this post.
 
I’ve also been following and it’s so hard not to just be enraged. Especially since the attorney general is a criminal anyway. He wrote three hospitals and threatened them if they went ahead with the procedure. So.Much.Anger
 
Thank you for saying you feel enraged @Mreader because that is exactly the way I have felt about this entire situation. Kate Cox has left the state to receive the healthcare she desperately needs. I know she will be treated with kindness, compassion, empathy and repsect where she receives the procedure she needs. For that I am grateful. I hope she knows the well wishes that are being sent her way from women and men across this country who know she has been treated unfathomably horrible by the state she lives in.
 
I'm fearful that Paxton will attempt to prosecute Cox if she returns to Texas. Wouldn't matter to him if it was illegal for him to do so, I think he'd try.

Fingers crossed women remember all the negative since Roe v Wade fell and vote accordingly.
 
I have opened new layers in the level of disgust I can experience watching things unfold as they are. Theses measures and so many others are needlessly cruel and barbaric. I want to breathe fire. Right this minute, in his direction.
 
Here's another example of abuse women are subject to under states' abortion laws.

www.huffpost.com

Ohio Woman Charged After Miscarrying Non-Viable Fetus

The Black woman's ordeal highlights the perils and uncertainties of being pregnant in a post-Roe America.
www.huffpost.com www.huffpost.com

Also, the other day during a TV interview, some schmuck, can't remember his name but he was a representative or senator, when asked who had the greater right to life when a decision had to be made to save mother vs fetus, stated that the woman ranked lower than her fetus. There is no altruism and respect for life at the heart of these cruel anti-abortion laws.

The irony persists that the US has high maternal and infant mortality rates which continue to rise. WHO ranks the US behind Russia in maternal death. We rank high in infant mortality rates among industrialized nations and sometimes worse among all countries where data is gathered depending on which organization is doing the gathering and analysis. There is unequal effort being made between lowering maternal and infant mortality rates and passing of stringent anti-abortion laws. I fail to see the logic.

tcf.org

The Worsening U.S. Maternal Health Crisis in Three Graphs

Last week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released the United States’ maternal mortality statistics for 2020, and the results
tcf.org tcf.org
 
ABC aired an informative show last week that can be found on Hulu titled: IMPACT x Nightline: On The Brink
 
There are no limits to absurdity in the State of Florida. The implications of this are so numerous and profound that my brain has gone numb.

"-there is no distinction between natural unborn persons and natural born persons
-a person exists from the moment of fertilization
-denying personhood for any stage past fertilization is a denial of rights guaranteed in the State Constitution and the United States Constitution
-"Person" means an individual, including an unborn child beginning at the moment of fertilization, entitled to rights recognized by the State Constitution and the United States Constitution"

 
In what way (and what words could be used) can honor killings and public stonings for women/girls be slid in under the door of USA law disguised as something else, at first.

Anyone else wonder that?
 

Screen Shot 2024-02-11 at 6.31.39 AM.png​

"​

Key Abortion Paper Retracted​

Ivan Oransky
February 07, 2024

A journal and publisher have retracted three papers about abortion, including one that has been used in court cases to support the suspension of FDA approval for mifepristone, aka an "abortion pill."
Sage, the publisher of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, announced the retractions yesterday and posted a retraction notice covering the three articles.
For one of those articles, initially flagged by a reader, "an independent reviewer with expertise in statistical analyses evaluated the concerns and opined that the article's presentation of the data in Figures 2 and 3 leads to an inaccurate conclusion and that the composition of the cohort studied has problems that could affect the article's conclusions," according to the notice.

The notice also said Sage "confirmed that all but one of the article's authors had an affiliation with one or more of Charlotte Lozier Institute, Elliot Institute, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, all pro-life advocacy organizations, despite having declared they had no conflicts of interest when they submitted the article for publication or in the article itself."
One of the peer reviewers, Sage learned, "was affiliated with Charlotte Lozier Institute at the time of the review," leading the publisher and journal editor to determine "the peer review for initial publication was unreliable." That referee also reviewed the other two now-retracted papers, according to Sage.





James Studnicki, the lead author of the three papers, told Retraction Watch the retractions were "a blatant attempt to discredit excellent research which is incongruent with a preferred abortion narrative." He told The Daily Wire, a conservative news outlet that was first to report on the retractions, the move was "completely unjustified." The Daily Wirenotes that "The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in March on the legality of restricting the abortion pill based on [Judge Matthew] Kacsmaryk's ruling, proceedings that will certainly be impacted by the retractions."

Sage had subjected one of the papers to an expression of concern in August 2023, saying they were investigating "potential issues regarding the representation of data in the article and author conflicts of interest" after being alerted by a reader. As News From The States reported then, the notice came after Chris Adkins, a professor at South University who teaches pharmaceutical sciences, raised concerns with Sage. As News From The States noted in August:
Kacsmaryk leaned hard on a 2021 study that was designed, funded and produced by the research arm of one of the most powerful anti-abortion political groups in the U.S. The judge cited this paper — which looked at Medicaid patients' visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion — to justify that a group of anti-abortion doctors and medical groups have legal standing to force the FDA to recall mifepristone.
Click to expand...
In a point-by-point response to Sage's critiques of the paper sent to the publisher in November and now shared with Retraction Watch, Studnicki and colleagues pointed out they had noted their affiliations in the original manuscript and the then-proposed retractions "misrepresent ICMJE disclosure standards," referring to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' guidelines. They also call some of the post-publication peer reviewers' critiques "factually incorrect" and "unfounded." They conclude:
  • No single specific finding in any of the three papers has been explicitly challenged, let alone invalidated.
  • There is no evidence of a major error, miscalculation, fabrication, or falsification.
  • There is no breach of any of the COPE guidelines that could permit Sage to retract any of our published papers.
  • The retraction of any of these papers, let alone all three, is demonstrably unwarranted.
Adkins told Retraction Watch he is "pleased the journal approached my concerns with legitimate and serious consideration." He continued:
It is reassuring that my initial concerns with the 2021 Studnicki et al. article were verified and affirmed by other experts. Despite the length of time spanning my initial communications with the journal and today's retractions, I understand that thorough investigations and re-review processes take time. Given that these now-retracted articles have been excessively cited by parties involved in ongoing federal judicial cases, now positioned before the SCOTUS, Sage's retractions should help our courts remain informed by the highest standards and quality in scientific and medical evidence.
Click to expand...
Update, 2/6/24, 2100 UTC: We note that — contrary to best industry practices described by the Committee on Publication Ethics — Sage has removed the original versions of the articles.


"
 
"

Mental Health Exemptions Emerge in Abortion Rights Initiatives on State Ballots​

— While proposals in other states specifically exclude the exception​

by Associated Press February 14, 2024


A photo of an abortion question on a Madison, Wisconsin ballot.

The weeks after Kaniya Harris found out she was pregnant were among the hardest in her life.
Final exams were fast approaching for the college junior. Her doctors told her she had an ovarian cyst, and the risk of ectopic pregnancy was high. The wait times for abortion clinics near her city of Bethesda, Maryland, seemed impossibly long. And she couldn't visit her family in Kentucky because of the state's abortion ban.

Harris was having regular panic attacks. It all felt like too much, she said.
"My mental health was at the lowest point it's ever been in my life," said Harris, who had an abortion last May.
As advocates push this year for ballot measure initiatives aiming to protect abortion rights, key differences have emerged in the language of proposed measures. Among them is the inclusion of mental health exceptions.
A Missouri proposal would allow lawmakers to restrict abortions after a fetus is considered viable, except if an abortion "is needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person." A similar measure has been proposed in Arizona. In 2022, Michigan voters passed an abortion rights amendment with a mental health exception for viability limits.
Meanwhile, proposed ballot measure language in Arkansas only says "physical health," excluding a mental health exception. Proposed abortion rights initiatives in other states -- including Florida, Montana, and Nebraska -- don't explicitly mention mental health.

"It's heartbreaking to hear about these policies ignoring mental health," said Harris, now 21. "An abortion can save someone's life, including when they're in a mental health emergency."
Most states with abortion bans include exemptions for life-threatening emergencies, but only Alabama's includes an exception for "serious mental illness" that could result in the death of the mother or fetus. Lawmakers added the provision after getting pressure from the state's medical association, which was concerned about women at high risk for suicide.
The law, passed in 2019, was among the strictest abortion restrictions in the country at the time. It did not include exceptions in cases of rape or incest and considered performing an abortion to be a felony. Alabama began enforcing the ban in 2022 after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which once granted a federal right to abortion.

Abortion bans in at least 10 states -- Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming -- explicitly exclude mental health conditions as a possible exception. Others are murkier, allowing for exemptions for the "life and health" of the woman without defining if mental health is included.

Medical experts say even states that do allow mental health exceptions require patients to jump through hoops that may be inaccessible to some people, especially those with low incomes. Alabama, for example, requires a state-licensed psychiatrist with at least 3 years of clinical experience to certify the mental health condition as an emergency.
Some days, when Harris would get home from class, she would be "so overwhelmed that I'd have a breakdown on the floor," she said. For 2 months, she cried every day. But facing an abortion ban in her home state and stigma from doctors, Harris said she didn't feel comfortable speaking about her experience with a mental health professional.
"People shouldn't have to jump through hoops and prove their pain to have access to the care they need," she said.
Mental health conditions were the leading underlying cause of pregnancy-related deaths from 2017 to 2019 with nearly 23% of pregnancy-related deaths attributed to mental health conditions, including suicides and overdoses from substance use disorders, according to the CDC.

About one in eight women experience postpartum depression, according to the CDC. But mental health struggles during pregnancy, especially the psychological trauma of those forced to carry unwanted pregnancies, are understudied, said Michelle Oberman, a Santa Clara University law professor researching the impact of abortion restrictions.
"These statistics, these stories of women's suffering have been really haunting me," Oberman said. "We don't as a society have a great track record of treating mental health the same way we do physical health."
Policies that dismiss mental health as less important than physical health put lives at risk, said Columbia University psychiatrist Paul Appelbaum, MD. He said there is also growing evidence that being denied an abortion causes significant mental distress. This distress has been apparent in recent stories of women forced to flee their states or continue pregnancies despite serious risks to their health.
"I am extremely concerned by the exclusion of mental health exceptions in these ballot measures," said Appelbaum, former president of the American Psychiatric Association. "It's absolutely cruel and will lead to the suffering deaths of pregnant women in these states."

Jayme Trevino, MD, MPH, an ob/gyn in Missouri and fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, said she has seen first-hand how being denied abortion care can affect a patient's well-being, including their mental health.
"It's a devastating, regular reality for my patients," she said, adding that she was grateful for the mental health exemption in the state's proposed ballot measure language.
Mallory Schwarz, a spokesperson for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, said the initiative's language "is written to make sure that doctors -- not politicians -- are able to determine what's best for their patients."
Conversely, an Arkansas initiative only includes exemptions "to protect a pregnant female's life or to protect a pregnant female from a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury."
Previous versions of the proposal included broader exceptions, said Gennie Diaz, executive director of For AR People. Initially, she said, "We wanted to craft language for a constitutional amendment that would be as broad as possible and would hopefully account for something like mental health."

But when handed a proposal with exceptions to "protect the life and health" of the mother, the state's attorney general, a Republican, rejected the language, saying it must define "health."
"That was a signal to us that we were going to have to make a choice," Diaz said. "And another unfortunate factor is that the majority of Arkansas voters are unlikely to support mental health as a reason for an abortion after a particular timeframe. We felt it was unlikely for a version that explicitly names mental health to pass."
Arkansas advocates were also worried the opposition campaign would target a mental health exception, Diaz said.
The National Right to Life Committee's (NRLC) model state legislation for abortion bans explicitly excludes mental health exceptions. These exceptions allow pregnant women "to kind of bypass those laws and still abort pregnancies of children that were viable," said Ingrid Duran, state legislative director of the NRLC.

"We specifically exclude mental health exemptions because we saw how that creates a loophole in a law and it leaves that unborn child at risk of dying for a sometimes treatable, sometimes temporary condition that the mother may be experiencing," she said.
When asked if targeting mental health exceptions will be part of their strategy for campaigning against abortion ballot measures in 2024, she said, "I can't necessarily say that would be part of the strategy." Still, said Duran, "When I see mental health exceptions like this, my heart drops."
Oberman from Santa Clara University said she expects to see the anti-abortion movement "employ a strategy of minimizing and dismissing the mental health consequences of forced pregnancy."
"The mental health issues of pregnant people remain in the shadows and highly stigmatized," she said. "And that clouds our judgment of what a medical emergency looks like during pregnancy."
"
 
I am SO sick and tired of these stories! I get a stomach ache and am mentally exhausted when trying to imagine what horrors women are experiencing. Can't say it enough: Vote like your life depends on it!
 
missy said:
"

Mental Health Exemptions Emerge in Abortion Rights Initiatives on State Ballots​

— While proposals in other states specifically exclude the exception​

by Associated Press February 14, 2024


A photo of an abortion question on a Madison, Wisconsin ballot.

The weeks after Kaniya Harris found out she was pregnant were among the hardest in her life.
Final exams were fast approaching for the college junior. Her doctors told her she had an ovarian cyst, and the risk of ectopic pregnancy was high. The wait times for abortion clinics near her city of Bethesda, Maryland, seemed impossibly long. And she couldn't visit her family in Kentucky because of the state's abortion ban.

Harris was having regular panic attacks. It all felt like too much, she said.
"My mental health was at the lowest point it's ever been in my life," said Harris, who had an abortion last May.
As advocates push this year for ballot measure initiatives aiming to protect abortion rights, key differences have emerged in the language of proposed measures. Among them is the inclusion of mental health exceptions.
A Missouri proposal would allow lawmakers to restrict abortions after a fetus is considered viable, except if an abortion "is needed to protect the life or physical or mental health of the pregnant person." A similar measure has been proposed in Arizona. In 2022, Michigan voters passed an abortion rights amendment with a mental health exception for viability limits.
Meanwhile, proposed ballot measure language in Arkansas only says "physical health," excluding a mental health exception. Proposed abortion rights initiatives in other states -- including Florida, Montana, and Nebraska -- don't explicitly mention mental health.

"It's heartbreaking to hear about these policies ignoring mental health," said Harris, now 21. "An abortion can save someone's life, including when they're in a mental health emergency."
Most states with abortion bans include exemptions for life-threatening emergencies, but only Alabama's includes an exception for "serious mental illness" that could result in the death of the mother or fetus. Lawmakers added the provision after getting pressure from the state's medical association, which was concerned about women at high risk for suicide.
The law, passed in 2019, was among the strictest abortion restrictions in the country at the time. It did not include exceptions in cases of rape or incest and considered performing an abortion to be a felony. Alabama began enforcing the ban in 2022 after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which once granted a federal right to abortion.

Abortion bans in at least 10 states -- Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wyoming -- explicitly exclude mental health conditions as a possible exception. Others are murkier, allowing for exemptions for the "life and health" of the woman without defining if mental health is included.

Medical experts say even states that do allow mental health exceptions require patients to jump through hoops that may be inaccessible to some people, especially those with low incomes. Alabama, for example, requires a state-licensed psychiatrist with at least 3 years of clinical experience to certify the mental health condition as an emergency.
Some days, when Harris would get home from class, she would be "so overwhelmed that I'd have a breakdown on the floor," she said. For 2 months, she cried every day. But facing an abortion ban in her home state and stigma from doctors, Harris said she didn't feel comfortable speaking about her experience with a mental health professional.
"People shouldn't have to jump through hoops and prove their pain to have access to the care they need," she said.
Mental health conditions were the leading underlying cause of pregnancy-related deaths from 2017 to 2019 with nearly 23% of pregnancy-related deaths attributed to mental health conditions, including suicides and overdoses from substance use disorders, according to the CDC.

About one in eight women experience postpartum depression, according to the CDC. But mental health struggles during pregnancy, especially the psychological trauma of those forced to carry unwanted pregnancies, are understudied, said Michelle Oberman, a Santa Clara University law professor researching the impact of abortion restrictions.
"These statistics, these stories of women's suffering have been really haunting me," Oberman said. "We don't as a society have a great track record of treating mental health the same way we do physical health."
Policies that dismiss mental health as less important than physical health put lives at risk, said Columbia University psychiatrist Paul Appelbaum, MD. He said there is also growing evidence that being denied an abortion causes significant mental distress. This distress has been apparent in recent stories of women forced to flee their states or continue pregnancies despite serious risks to their health.
"I am extremely concerned by the exclusion of mental health exceptions in these ballot measures," said Appelbaum, former president of the American Psychiatric Association. "It's absolutely cruel and will lead to the suffering deaths of pregnant women in these states."

Jayme Trevino, MD, MPH, an ob/gyn in Missouri and fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health, said she has seen first-hand how being denied abortion care can affect a patient's well-being, including their mental health.
"It's a devastating, regular reality for my patients," she said, adding that she was grateful for the mental health exemption in the state's proposed ballot measure language.
Mallory Schwarz, a spokesperson for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, said the initiative's language "is written to make sure that doctors -- not politicians -- are able to determine what's best for their patients."
Conversely, an Arkansas initiative only includes exemptions "to protect a pregnant female's life or to protect a pregnant female from a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury."
Previous versions of the proposal included broader exceptions, said Gennie Diaz, executive director of For AR People. Initially, she said, "We wanted to craft language for a constitutional amendment that would be as broad as possible and would hopefully account for something like mental health."

But when handed a proposal with exceptions to "protect the life and health" of the mother, the state's attorney general, a Republican, rejected the language, saying it must define "health."
"That was a signal to us that we were going to have to make a choice," Diaz said. "And another unfortunate factor is that the majority of Arkansas voters are unlikely to support mental health as a reason for an abortion after a particular timeframe. We felt it was unlikely for a version that explicitly names mental health to pass."
Arkansas advocates were also worried the opposition campaign would target a mental health exception, Diaz said.
The National Right to Life Committee's (NRLC) model state legislation for abortion bans explicitly excludes mental health exceptions. These exceptions allow pregnant women "to kind of bypass those laws and still abort pregnancies of children that were viable," said Ingrid Duran, state legislative director of the NRLC.

"We specifically exclude mental health exemptions because we saw how that creates a loophole in a law and it leaves that unborn child at risk of dying for a sometimes treatable, sometimes temporary condition that the mother may be experiencing," she said.
When asked if targeting mental health exceptions will be part of their strategy for campaigning against abortion ballot measures in 2024, she said, "I can't necessarily say that would be part of the strategy." Still, said Duran, "When I see mental health exceptions like this, my heart drops."
Oberman from Santa Clara University said she expects to see the anti-abortion movement "employ a strategy of minimizing and dismissing the mental health consequences of forced pregnancy."
"The mental health issues of pregnant people remain in the shadows and highly stigmatized," she said. "And that clouds our judgment of what a medical emergency looks like during pregnancy."
"
Click to expand...

This is a travesty. We deserve the same considerations. So do all stigmatized and marginalized groups. Unconscionable.
 
ItsMainelyYou said:
This is a travesty. We deserve the same considerations. So do all stigmatized and marginalized groups. Unconscionable.
Click to expand...

Yup. I’m exhausted and disgusted about all the miscarriages of justice happening everywhere. This country and this world is fu***d
 
The fallout from Roe v Wade continues to grow in absurdity. A couple sued a cryogenic storage facility when their embryos were destroyed in a bizarre accident. The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are protected under its Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. The decision will have a negative impact on IVF and has the potential to end IVF programs at least as we now know them. From an article published in "The Hill":

“The relevant statutory text is clear: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies on its face to all unborn children, without limitation,” the court’s decision stated.

The court found that there is no unwritten exception, as the defendants have argued, to the law that applies to “unborn children who are not physically located ‘in utero’ — that is, inside a biological uterus — at the time they are killed.”

It is plain from the content of the entire story that the facility should have lost the lawsuit based on negligence rather than a conservative court's bias.
Screenshot 2024-02-20 at 8.32.12 AM.png
 
@Matata I saw this story yesterday and was so disgusted and angry, I couldn't even finish reading it! A little blob that might not even develop/implant has rights and is a person????? Make it make sense! Pretty soon, they're going to be coming for ovaries - or anything involved in baby making. I am SO freaking angry, but also thankful I don't live in one of these backasswards states. :x2
 
PinkAndBlueBling said:
I am SO freaking angry, but also thankful I don't live in one of these backasswards states.
Click to expand...

Did you see my earlier post #920? Florida did it too. It's not a stretch to think that sooner or later all forms of contraception be attacked as interfering with the potential of sperm & egg to form a person.
 
...And these zygotes have full rights and protections, before potentially settling on being female, that is.

This is madness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top