• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The doctors said she wasn’t in immediate danger.

    You presented it as a law being broken. The only law broken would have been if doctors performed the abortion early because she voted to make it illegal.

    • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      From her lawsuit:

      According to the lawsuit, doctors told Farmer that she was at risk of infection, severe blood loss, the loss of her uterus and death.

      This is immediate danger. The law would not have been broken had the procedure been performed…

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        “At risk” isn’t an immediate threat. Having high blood pressure makes you, “at risk.” That’s not the same as having a heart attack which is an immediate threat to your life.

        The law only allows abortion under immediate threat.

        She wanted an early abortion because it was the safe option. But the law precludes proactive healthcare.

        • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          20 hours ago

          If your water breaks at 16 weeks, that is an emergency. According to the lawsuit, they knew this quite well:

          By the time Ms. Farmer arrived at TUKH, she had been evaluated and it was clear that she had lost all her amniotic fluid, and her pregnancy—which she had dreamed of and longed for—was no longer viable. And unless she received immediate medical intervention to end the pregnancy in a medical setting, she was at risk of severe blood loss, sepsis, loss of fertility, and death.

          It could not be a more obvious example of a medical error. When the law says this is allowed, the law is not at fault.

          Not sure why you replied with the same remark to two different comments, but whatever.