Five Texas women who say they have been denied medically necessary abortions filed a lawsuit against the state on Tuesday, saying the strict six-week ban puts their lives at risk.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the women by the Center for Reproductive Rights, includes detailed accounts of their experiences and reflects what reproductive rights experts have warned would happen if the government took control of medical decisions away from patients and their caregivers.
The five women – Amanda Zurawski, Lauren Miller, Lauren Hall, Anna Zargarian and Ashley Brandt – were both pregnant when their doctors informed them that their fetuses were not viable or would be born with severe abnormalities. More urgently, they learned, their own lives were in danger from the pregnancies.
But because of a 2021 Texas law that bans abortions once heart activity can be detected in the embryo or fetus, they won’t be allowed to perform abortions in their home state, forcing them down a dangerous path or seek different treatments. stay away.
One of the most heartbreaking accounts of the trial comes from Zurawski, 35, an Austin woman who was nearly 18 weeks pregnant last August when her doctor diagnosed her with an “incompetent cervix.” which means that the organ has dilated prematurely. would result in a viable child.
SUZANNE CORDEIRO via Getty Images
Those complications began to make her sick, but since she was still stable and the fetus had a heartbeat, the hospital told her the Texas ban meant there was nothing her doctors could do but wait for her to go into labor. Because there was a possibility that she would give birth in the next few hours, doctors told her to stay 15 minutes away from the hospital, eliminating the possibility of traveling out of state to have an abortion.
A few days later, on the way home from a checkup with her obstetrician, Zurawski “had chills and started shaking, and when she got home she had a temperature of 101 degrees and was not responding to her husband’s questions — all signs of sepsis,” the lawsuit states.
Only after doctors confirmed she was septic – a life-threatening reaction in the bloodstream to an infection – did the hospital agree to induce labor for a baby who would die shortly after birth.
Her infection persisted, landing her in the intensive care unit and causing severe scar tissue to develop in her uterus and fallopian tubes. One of your fallopian tubes remains closed and does not work. Because of the damage to her reproductive organs, doctors told her she would likely have to try IVF to get pregnant again, an invasive, expensive and often unsuccessful process.
“I love Texas and it kills me that my state doesn’t seem to care if I live or die.”
— Lauren Hall, Plaintiff
Zurawski joined other plaintiffs outside the Texas Capitol on Tuesday after announcing his lawsuit.
“What we needed was an abortion, a standard medical procedure,” she said. “An abortion would have avoided the unnecessary harm and suffering I suffered, not just the psychological trauma that came with three days of waiting, but also the physical damage to my body – the extent of which is still being ascertained.”
The other four women in the lawsuit received similar reports from their doctors midway through their pregnancies, and all were denied abortions because of the Texas ban. When it became clear that their health and lives were in danger, they were forced to travel out of state for abortions, three of them in Colorado and one as far away as Washington state. That can cost patients hundreds or thousands of dollars in travel expenses, and even then it’s not always an option, as Zurawski’s case demonstrates.
Hall, who traveled to Seattle for an abortion after learning her non-viable pregnancy could cause hemorrhaging, said she feared she would not receive proper care in Texas if that happened and had visions of bleeding. them to death on the bathroom floor.
“I love Texas and it kills me that my state doesn’t seem to care if I live or die,” he said on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.
SUZANNE CORDEIRO via Getty Images
Although the Texas ban includes an exception for any “life-threatening physical condition” or “serious risk of substantial impairment of an important bodily function,” Tuesday’s lawsuit claims the law could force hospitals — lawsuits, attention and jail time for abortion. providers – to navigate a dangerously gray area and delay care until mothers are on their deathbeds.
″[W]With the threat of losing their medical licenses, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and up to 99 years in prison hanging over their heads, it’s no wonder doctors and hospitals are turning away patients, even emergency patients like Amanda, Lauren M. ., Lauren H., Anna and Ashley,” the suit says.
Vice President Kamala Harris extended her support to the plaintiffs on Tuesday and said she met with Zurawski to hear his story firsthand.
“Many ‘so-called’ extremist leaders advocate ‘freedom for all’ while directly attacking the freedom to make one’s own health decisions,” Harris said in a statement. “Like the vast majority of Americans, the president and I believe that women — in consultation with their doctors — should be in charge of reproductive health care, not politicians.
I’m a passionate and motivated journalist with a focus on world news. My experience spans across various media outlets, including Buna Times where I serve as an author. Over the years, I have become well-versed in researching and reporting on global topics, ranging from international politics to current events.