ADVERTISEMENT

Texas woman asks judge to let her terminate pregnancy after lethal fetal diagnosis

I didn’t read the article but why not quietly go somewhere that would allow the procedure to take place? Why is it something that needs to be in the public square?
It’s simply no one else’s business.
Because it’s not as simple as that?
Shouldn't have gotten knocked up then. Also Inb4 you make some rape comparison like that is the norm in these circumstances.
Or, Texas could have at least allowed more/better defined exceptions for abortions? While not the norm, medically legitimate reasons for abortion are tragically not uncommon.
Life can be complicated. What if u and your partner feel ready. And then once the miracle happens. The partner bolts for another state.
Or any other host of things that life can throw at you, that in hindsight, would have had an impact on the decision to have a baby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
And that is very unfortunate, Idont disagree. She will unfortunately have to take a day or two off work to have the procedure done. Why would this be an unexpected end result?
It’s absurd to have to go to a judge or drive out of state in this scenario and even if she takes the out-of-state path, her husband and doc are open to lawsuits under Texas state laws (likely why they’re going the judge route vs. the out-of-state route).

While it’s unlikely the lawsuits would be successful, the husband/doc would still have to spend time and money fighting these lawsuits and the family would have to go through, again via the legal process, all the pain that comes from losing a pregnancy.

My wife had 2 miscarriages in the 7-10 week range and those were horrendously painful to go through emotionally, I can’t imagine getting to where this woman is and finding out there’s basically no shot for a baby that even lives through a day.
 
6 hours, yes. I'm sure she can manage.

Again: it's >12 hours
Plus several for the procedure

Upwards of 2 days, instead of being able to have the procedure done at her local clinic

Plus, she WILL have to go to an out-of-network provider, since her in-network provider in TX cannot perform the procedure.
 
Cox, who already has two children, both delivered by Cesarean section, also has elevated glucose and underlying health conditions. The lawsuit alleges she is at increased risk of gestational hypertension and diabetes and complications from anesthesia and cesarean section, if she were to carry the pregnancy to term.

And yet she decided to get pregnant again.
 
Cox, who already has two children, both delivered by Cesarean section, also has elevated glucose and underlying health conditions. The lawsuit alleges she is at increased risk of gestational hypertension and diabetes and complications from anesthesia and cesarean section, if she were to carry the pregnancy to term.

And yet she decided to get pregnant again.
I don't see you ever being in a position to get a woman pregnant
 
Cox, who already has two children, both delivered by Cesarean section, also has elevated glucose and underlying health conditions. The lawsuit alleges she is at increased risk of gestational hypertension and diabetes and complications from anesthesia and cesarean section, if she were to carry the pregnancy to term.

And yet she decided to get pregnant again.
I had gestational diabetes as well and an emergency C-section with my first. I also had a ruptured ectopic and came so close to cashing it in I had the last rites of the Church. Yet I wanted to complete my family and so with careful prenatal care I delivered my beautiful daughter (no pic).
This fetus will not be viable in a normal fashion. It’s her business and no one else’s.
Mind your own business and let this family heal.
 
Still it’s no one else’s issue. She’s carrying a fetus that will not become a healthy human. I have nothing but sympathy for her situation.
you'd posted that if no one knew then no one finds out. At this point of her pregnancy, just saying i don't think that's likely.

Upsetting to me that there are people who think she should still have to carry that fetus to term. I can't think of many things more cruel.
 
My wife and I were once in this exact same situation. A baby at 20 weeks with amniotic band syndrome - basically like the developing fetus being wrapped in cords that peeled off the amniotic sac. These were wrapped around her head and constricted the spinal cord and other vital areas. The baby would’ve been severely deformed and would’ve died soon after birth. Mom’s physical health not at risk but emotionally was tough.

After a couple days in the hospital and multiple tests we decided to end the pregnancy the following day. The night before the procedure she had a miscarriage.

It was a shitty thing to go through and I can’t imagine having to deal with the government and courts on top of that.
 
My wife and I were once in this exact same situation. A baby at 20 weeks with amniotic band syndrome - basically like the developing fetus being wrapped in cords that peeled off the amniotic sac. These were wrapped around her head and constricted the spinal cord and other vital areas. The baby would’ve been severely deformed and would’ve died soon after birth. Mom’s physical health not at risk but emotionally was tough.

After a couple days in the hospital and multiple tests we decided to end the pregnancy the following day. The night before the procedure she had a miscarriage.

It was a shitty thing to go through and I can’t imagine having to deal with the government and courts on top of that.
I’m really sorry for your loss. By that point you generally feel like you’re in the clear. And I’m certain that if you’ve had children since it was a very anxious time.
 
A judge in Texas is allowing a woman who is 20 weeks pregnant to get an abortion in a rare case of a pregnant woman seeking a court order for the procedure since Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court last year.

Keeping up with politics is easy with The 5-Minute Fix Newsletter, in your inbox weekdays.

The case involves Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two from the Dallas area, who asked the nonprofit Center for Reproductive Rights for legal help in obtaining an emergency abortion in Texas after she learned last week that her fetus had Trisomy 18, also called Edwards syndrome. The genetic condition is one “that cannot sustain life,” as Cox wrote in an op-ed on Wednesday in the Dallas Morning News.

Cox’s doctor warned that carrying the pregnancy to term could jeopardize her health and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy, according to the lawsuit filed on her behalf.



Travis County District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, an elected Democrat, said Thursday that she would grant a temporary restraining order that would allow Cox to have an abortion under the narrow exceptions to the state’s ban.
“The Court finds that Ms. Cox’s life, health, and fertility are currently at serious risk,” the judge wrote. “The longer Ms. Cox stays pregnant, the greater the risks to her life.”
States where abortion is legal, banned or under threat
The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, threatened legal action if the abortion takes place. In a letter addressed to the hospitals involved with Cox’s care, Paxton said that Cox’s doctor did not meet “all of the elements necessary to fall within an exception to Texas’ abortion laws” and that the judge was “not medically qualified to make this determination.”

Paxton said the judge’s order would not excuse the hospital or doctor from civil or criminal liability “including first degree felony prosecutions.” He added that the temporary restraining order “will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires.”

“An abortion was not something I ever imagined I would want or need; I just never thought I’d be in the situation I’m in right now,” Cox wrote in the opinion piece. “Twenty weeks pregnant with a baby that won’t survive and could jeopardize my health and a future pregnancy.”


Texas has several laws restricting or banning abortion, although the state has some narrow exceptions including “substantial impairment of major bodily function” of a pregnant person, according to the Texas Tribune.



The suit is not related to a separate, broader case, Zurawski v. State of Texas, in which five women who had been pregnant sued the state over its near-total abortion ban. The women have claimed that state law denied them proper obstetrics health care and placed their lives in danger.
Four of the women traveled out of state to have abortions; the fifth, whose fetus did not have a chance of surviving, was allowed to deliver only after she became septic, leaving her with permanent physical damage. The case now involves 20 women and the Texas state Supreme Court held a hearing on the matter last week.
Texas abortion hearing culminates with tension and emotions high
Molly Duane, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in an online news briefing that she would not comment on when or where Cox would proceed with an abortion, but she hoped that it could help other women in similar situations.
“We are hopeful that this case and the Zurawski case will lead to more people being able to access the necessary abortion care that they need,” Duane said. “The issues are quite clearly overlapping.”

 
This is reprehensible.

The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, threatened legal action if the abortion takes place. In a letter addressed to the hospitals involved with Cox’s care, Paxton said that Cox’s doctor did not meet “all of the elements necessary to fall within an exception to Texas’ abortion laws” and that the judge was “not medically qualified to make this determination.”

Paxton said the judge’s order would not excuse the hospital or doctor from civil or criminal liability “including first degree felony prosecutions.” He added that the temporary restraining order “will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires.”
 
This is reprehensible.

The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, threatened legal action if the abortion takes place. In a letter addressed to the hospitals involved with Cox’s care, Paxton said that Cox’s doctor did not meet “all of the elements necessary to fall within an exception to Texas’ abortion laws” and that the judge was “not medically qualified to make this determination.”

Paxton said the judge’s order would not excuse the hospital or doctor from civil or criminal liability “including first degree felony prosecutions.” He added that the temporary restraining order “will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires.”

Republicans are awful people and Paxton is a ghoul
 
I had gestational diabetes as well and an emergency C-section with my first. I also had a ruptured ectopic and came so close to cashing it in I had the last rites of the Church. Yet I wanted to complete my family and so with careful prenatal care I delivered my beautiful daughter (no pic).
This fetus will not be viable in a normal fashion. It’s her business and no one else’s.
Mind your own business and let this family heal.
She should have bought a puppy. She knew the risks.
 
A judge in Texas is allowing a woman who is 20 weeks pregnant to get an abortion in a rare case of a pregnant woman seeking a court order for the procedure since Roe v. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court last year.

Keeping up with politics is easy with The 5-Minute Fix Newsletter, in your inbox weekdays.

The case involves Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two from the Dallas area, who asked the nonprofit Center for Reproductive Rights for legal help in obtaining an emergency abortion in Texas after she learned last week that her fetus had Trisomy 18, also called Edwards syndrome. The genetic condition is one “that cannot sustain life,” as Cox wrote in an op-ed on Wednesday in the Dallas Morning News.

Cox’s doctor warned that carrying the pregnancy to term could jeopardize her health and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy, according to the lawsuit filed on her behalf.



Travis County District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble, an elected Democrat, said Thursday that she would grant a temporary restraining order that would allow Cox to have an abortion under the narrow exceptions to the state’s ban.
“The Court finds that Ms. Cox’s life, health, and fertility are currently at serious risk,” the judge wrote. “The longer Ms. Cox stays pregnant, the greater the risks to her life.”
States where abortion is legal, banned or under threat
The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, threatened legal action if the abortion takes place. In a letter addressed to the hospitals involved with Cox’s care, Paxton said that Cox’s doctor did not meet “all of the elements necessary to fall within an exception to Texas’ abortion laws” and that the judge was “not medically qualified to make this determination.”

Paxton said the judge’s order would not excuse the hospital or doctor from civil or criminal liability “including first degree felony prosecutions.” He added that the temporary restraining order “will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires.”

“An abortion was not something I ever imagined I would want or need; I just never thought I’d be in the situation I’m in right now,” Cox wrote in the opinion piece. “Twenty weeks pregnant with a baby that won’t survive and could jeopardize my health and a future pregnancy.”


Texas has several laws restricting or banning abortion, although the state has some narrow exceptions including “substantial impairment of major bodily function” of a pregnant person, according to the Texas Tribune.



The suit is not related to a separate, broader case, Zurawski v. State of Texas, in which five women who had been pregnant sued the state over its near-total abortion ban. The women have claimed that state law denied them proper obstetrics health care and placed their lives in danger.
Four of the women traveled out of state to have abortions; the fifth, whose fetus did not have a chance of surviving, was allowed to deliver only after she became septic, leaving her with permanent physical damage. The case now involves 20 women and the Texas state Supreme Court held a hearing on the matter last week.
Texas abortion hearing culminates with tension and emotions high
Molly Duane, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in an online news briefing that she would not comment on when or where Cox would proceed with an abortion, but she hoped that it could help other women in similar situations.
“We are hopeful that this case and the Zurawski case will lead to more people being able to access the necessary abortion care that they need,” Duane said. “The issues are quite clearly overlapping.”

Texas is appealing.
 
This is reprehensible.

The Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, threatened legal action if the abortion takes place. In a letter addressed to the hospitals involved with Cox’s care, Paxton said that Cox’s doctor did not meet “all of the elements necessary to fall within an exception to Texas’ abortion laws” and that the judge was “not medically qualified to make this determination.”

Paxton said the judge’s order would not excuse the hospital or doctor from civil or criminal liability “including first degree felony prosecutions.” He added that the temporary restraining order “will expire long before the statute of limitations for violating Texas’ abortion laws expires.”
This is the demonic part.
 
I am 100% pro choice. As in no govt restrictions and the decision should be made between a woman and her doctor.

But your statement is false.

https://www.verywellhealth.com/reasons-for-abortion-906589

Reasons for Abortions%
Not financially prepared40%
Not a good time36%
Issues with partner31%
Need to focus on other children29%
Interferes with future plans20%
Not emotionally or mentally prepared19%
Health issue12%
Unable to provide a “good” life12%
Not independent or mature enough7%
Influence from family or friends5%
Don’t want children3%


Great post.

The vast majority of abortions are for birth control because the parent(s) doesn't want to be inconvenienced by having a baby.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT