Outcomes of Overturning Roe Vs. Wade

[Josh]

I would assume nearly anyone that wants an abortion and is in a state that restricts it would go to another state.

For context, Allegiant plane tickets are often $39. Or you can just get in the car and drive. Americans travel between states all the time.

[Bootstrap]

If we want abortions to go down, I think we need to win hearts and minds. We need to show people a better way.

[Josh]

If we want abortions to go down, I think we need to win hearts and minds. We need to show people a better way.

Whilst the state should certainly investigate and punish murder, I agree that as Christians, we need to show people a better way than murdering and assaulting each other. That's honestly been part of our mission since Christ walked the earth.

With that said, though, policy should restrict abortions, period. There is a lot of talk about how strategically it was bad for the Republicans to pass so many laws against abortion. I find this a bit specious. Murder is murder and should be illegal and punished severely.

[Bootstrap]

If we want abortions to go down, I think we need to win hearts and minds. We need to show people a better way.

Whilst the state should certainly investigate and punish murder, I agree that as Christians, we need to show people a better way than murdering and assaulting each other. That's honestly been part of our mission since Christ walked the earth.

With that said, though, policy should restrict abortions, period. There is a lot of talk about how strategically it was bad for the Republicans to pass so many laws against abortion. I find this a bit specious. Murder is murder and should be illegal and punished severely.

I think abortion should be illegal. I think we basically agree here.

[temporal1]

Whilst the state should certainly investigate and punish murder, I agree that as Christians, we need to show people a better way than murdering and assaulting each other. That's honestly been part of our mission since Christ walked the earth.

With that said, though, policy should restrict abortions, period.

There is a lot of talk about how strategically it was bad for the Republicans to pass so many laws against abortion. I find this a bit specious. Murder is murder and should be illegal and punished severely.

Pray the world does not completely fall into dull+primitive warring camps, where political strategy, popular opinion, corporate profits, earthly gain, not TRUTH, are the only remaining motivations.

If witnessing the literal+open celebration of abortion does not “chill to the very bone,” that’s a serious indicator of damaged spirits.

For the OP:
This has been a widespread outcome of the overturn:
the literal+open celebration of abortion (by young healthy privileged young women of all description, with common experience of gov education). Those with access to every means of prevention known to humankind.

For those who had any doubt about how severe the heart problems are in this godless pagan callous culture.

[Szdfan]

A pregnant Texas woman is suing the state for a medically necessary abortion due to the vagueness of Texas law. The suit is about to go before the state supreme court.

A pregnant Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal condition sued the state on Tuesday seeking an emergency court order to allow her doctor to perform an abortion, despite the state’s strict bans on the procedure.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/us/t ... =url-share

The vagueness of the exceptions in Texas have prevented doctors from performing the procedure in most cases, lawyers for the woman, Kate Cox, have argued. A decision in her case could force the state to more clearly define what is allowed under the law.

Ms. Cox is 20 weeks pregnant, and her fetus has been diagnosed with trisomy 18, a condition that in all but very rare cases leads to miscarriage, stillbirth or the death of the infant within the first year after birth. Despite trips to the emergency room for pain and discharge, Ms. Cox, 31, a mother of two young children who lives in the Dallas area, has been told by doctors that she is required to continue her pregnancy under Texas law.

“Essentially, it was, as long as the baby has a heartbeat, there was nothing you could do in Texas,” said Ms. Cox in an interview on Tuesday.

Her emergency appeal comes as the Texas Supreme Court is weighing a broad effort by abortion rights advocates and women who have been denied abortions to compel state officials to clarify the medical situations in which doctors can perform abortions without fear of civil or criminal penalties. That suit was filed in March by the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is also representing Ms. Cox.

A district court judge ruled in their favor over the summer, shielding doctors from prosecution for providing abortions under a range of circumstances, including when pregnancy complications create a health risk, or when the fetus is unlikely to survive. But the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, appealed, putting the district court ruling on hold for now. The case, Zurawski v. State of Texas, could be decided by the state’s highest civil court in the coming weeks.

“Our contention is that Kate falls within the medical exemption, but her doctors can’t proceed and give her the medical care that she needs unless and until a court agrees,” Ms. Duane said. “Otherwise,” she added, “her doctor will risk life in prison, loss of her medical license and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.”

This is a really tragic story. The parents wanted the baby, but diagnosis of Trisomy 18 means that the fetus will not survive and it poses a risk to the mother's life. However, since Texas's medical exemptions are so vague, doctors will not provide the procedure this mother needs.

[Soloist]

This is a really tragic story. The parents wanted the baby, but diagnosis of Trisomy 18 means that the fetus will not survive and it poses a risk to the mother's life. However, since Texas's medical exemptions are so vague, doctors will not provide the procedure this mother needs.

I fail to see how it poses a risk the mother’s life past any pregnancy. Can you explain why it poses a risk?
10 year survival is almost 10% among those who survive to birth. One out of every 5000 babies lives.
Certainly there would be some emotional trauma, but if the baby lived, they would potentially have 10 years of a wonderful life with this child. Certainly not a easy life. I mentioned elsewhere thinking that adoption for special-needs was an option, this would be the sort of baby to adopt.
You might as well include The rest of the trisomy’s if this is justified abortion.

How will trisomy affect my baby?

An extra chromosome changes the blueprint for your baby and will cause physical abnormalities that are present at birth (congenital defects), like distinct facial features along with intellectual disabilities. Many children born with trisomy will have subsequent health concerns that arise following their diagnosis like frequent ear infections, heart problems or sleep apnea, but with adequate treatment, your child will be able to live a happy and full life.

The survival rate for babies born with trisomy 18 or trisomy 13 is low after the first few weeks of life (neonatal period) due to the severity of the condition, especially delayed or abnormal organ development. Your healthcare provider will assess your baby’s health and offer treatment to increase the survival rate for children born with these conditions.

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/ ... 12-trisomy

[temporal1]

This is a really tragic story. The parents wanted the baby, but diagnosis of Trisomy 18 means that the fetus will not survive and it poses a risk to the mother's life. However, since Texas's medical exemptions are so vague, doctors will not provide the procedure this mother needs.

It’s the NYT, all-in for abortion, thus, impossible to know. Similar to the Ohio pregnant child case.
The pro-abortion activists are ruthless.

Illinois and other states are so abortion-accomodating, i wouldn’t be surprised if they wouldn’t be willing to provide all expenses paid travel .. unless, they, too, are focused on using this case to push abortion.

i question why Texas doctors would not assist, they, too, could be using the case to push The Agenda.

i would not jump to any conclusion.

prayers for mother+child.

[NedFlanders]

A pregnant Texas woman is suing the state for a medically necessary abortion due to the vagueness of Texas law. The suit is about to go before the state supreme court.

A pregnant Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal condition sued the state on Tuesday seeking an emergency court order to allow her doctor to perform an abortion, despite the state’s strict bans on the procedure.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/us/t ... =url-share

The vagueness of the exceptions in Texas have prevented doctors from performing the procedure in most cases, lawyers for the woman, Kate Cox, have argued. A decision in her case could force the state to more clearly define what is allowed under the law.

Ms. Cox is 20 weeks pregnant, and her fetus has been diagnosed with trisomy 18, a condition that in all but very rare cases leads to miscarriage, stillbirth or the death of the infant within the first year after birth. Despite trips to the emergency room for pain and discharge, Ms. Cox, 31, a mother of two young children who lives in the Dallas area, has been told by doctors that she is required to continue her pregnancy under Texas law.

“Essentially, it was, as long as the baby has a heartbeat, there was nothing you could do in Texas,” said Ms. Cox in an interview on Tuesday.

Her emergency appeal comes as the Texas Supreme Court is weighing a broad effort by abortion rights advocates and women who have been denied abortions to compel state officials to clarify the medical situations in which doctors can perform abortions without fear of civil or criminal penalties. That suit was filed in March by the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is also representing Ms. Cox.

A district court judge ruled in their favor over the summer, shielding doctors from prosecution for providing abortions under a range of circumstances, including when pregnancy complications create a health risk, or when the fetus is unlikely to survive. But the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, appealed, putting the district court ruling on hold for now. The case, Zurawski v. State of Texas, could be decided by the state’s highest civil court in the coming weeks.

“Our contention is that Kate falls within the medical exemption, but her doctors can’t proceed and give her the medical care that she needs unless and until a court agrees,” Ms. Duane said. “Otherwise,” she added, “her doctor will risk life in prison, loss of her medical license and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.”

This is a really tragic story. The parents wanted the baby, but diagnosis of Trisomy 18 means that the fetus will not survive and it poses a risk to the mother's life. However, since Texas's medical exemptions are so vague, doctors will not provide the procedure this mother needs.

Is it always someone else’s fault?

You say they wanted the baby - but then did they ever consider the risks?

The modern world is so delusional that you can have your cake and eat it too.

If you don’t want risk than don’t have sex - simple fix.

[Szdfan]

A pregnant Texas woman is suing the state for a medically necessary abortion due to the vagueness of Texas law. The suit is about to go before the state supreme court.

A pregnant Texas woman whose fetus has a fatal condition sued the state on Tuesday seeking an emergency court order to allow her doctor to perform an abortion, despite the state’s strict bans on the procedure.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/05/us/t ... =url-share

The vagueness of the exceptions in Texas have prevented doctors from performing the procedure in most cases, lawyers for the woman, Kate Cox, have argued. A decision in her case could force the state to more clearly define what is allowed under the law.

Ms. Cox is 20 weeks pregnant, and her fetus has been diagnosed with trisomy 18, a condition that in all but very rare cases leads to miscarriage, stillbirth or the death of the infant within the first year after birth. Despite trips to the emergency room for pain and discharge, Ms. Cox, 31, a mother of two young children who lives in the Dallas area, has been told by doctors that she is required to continue her pregnancy under Texas law.

“Essentially, it was, as long as the baby has a heartbeat, there was nothing you could do in Texas,” said Ms. Cox in an interview on Tuesday.

Her emergency appeal comes as the Texas Supreme Court is weighing a broad effort by abortion rights advocates and women who have been denied abortions to compel state officials to clarify the medical situations in which doctors can perform abortions without fear of civil or criminal penalties. That suit was filed in March by the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is also representing Ms. Cox.

A district court judge ruled in their favor over the summer, shielding doctors from prosecution for providing abortions under a range of circumstances, including when pregnancy complications create a health risk, or when the fetus is unlikely to survive. But the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, appealed, putting the district court ruling on hold for now. The case, Zurawski v. State of Texas, could be decided by the state’s highest civil court in the coming weeks.

“Our contention is that Kate falls within the medical exemption, but her doctors can’t proceed and give her the medical care that she needs unless and until a court agrees,” Ms. Duane said. “Otherwise,” she added, “her doctor will risk life in prison, loss of her medical license and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.”

This is a really tragic story. The parents wanted the baby, but diagnosis of Trisomy 18 means that the fetus will not survive and it poses a risk to the mother's life. However, since Texas's medical exemptions are so vague, doctors will not provide the procedure this mother needs.

Is it always someone else’s fault?

You say they wanted the baby - but then did they ever consider the risks?

The modern world is so delusional that you can have your cake and eat it too.

If you don’t want risk than don’t have sex - simple fix.

Huh?

From the article I cited —

In an interview, Ms. Cox said that she and her husband had been excited at the prospect of a third child joining their 3-year-old daughter and 1-year-old son. The couple only glancingly followed the rapidly shifting legal landscape around abortion in Texas as Roe was overturned and bans went into effect.

“I thought I would never need an abortion,” she said. “I want a big family.”