Disaster "I wasn't dead enough for an abortion": Texas mom blames Trump for almost losing her life - Actions have consequences.

https://www.salon.com/2024/06/03/i-wasnt-enough-for-an-abortion-texas-mom-for-almost-losing-her-life/

https://archive.is/hyAHh

If Trump wins in November, "he will make this nightmare a reality nationwide," says Lauren Miller​

By CHARLES R. DAVIS​

Deputy News Editor

Lauren Miller was pregnant with twins when she landed in the emergency room after 36 straight hours of vomiting. An ultrasound would reveal that one of her expected twins had fluid where the brain should be developing.

"After speaking with multiple doctors and genetic counselors, we kept arriving at the same point: our son would die," Miller recalled during a press call organized by the Democratic Party on Monday. She could die too too, her doctors said, which would in turn kill the viable fetus and leave her toddler at home without a mother.

The course of treatment was obvious: Miller needed an abortion. Before the summer of 2022, that wouldn't have been much of a problem, even in her home state of Texas, as there was a federally recognized constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. After the Supreme Court's conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade, however, more than a dozen states imposed strict bans on the procedure. And while Texas, like other states, has exceptions to protect the life of a mother, in practice there is a concern that recommending one could result in a medical professional being liable for what the state GOP argues is an act of murder.

"As my medical providers tried to counsel me on my options," Miller said, "they would just stop mid-sentence, looking for the right words. It was like they were afraid that they would be arrested just for saying the word 'abortion' out loud."

One specialist, Miller recalled, was visibly upset, tearing off his gloves and angrily tossing them in the trash. "I can't help you anymore," he said. "You need to leave the state."

Miller was finally able to terminate the pregnancy when she heeded the specialist's advice and left the Lone Star state.

"I was at risk of organ damage to my kidneys and brain, but I wasn't dead enough for an abortion in Texas, " Miller said.
Texas Republicans imposed a near-total ban on abortion following the Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs decision, a move that has been followed by complaints, from pregnant people and their doctors, that the prohibition is unclear on when a pregnancy can be terminated to protect a life.

Last week, the state's all-Republican Supreme Court rejected a legal challenge from women who said their lives were endangered as a result of complicated pregnancies that their doctors were hesitant to properly treat; the court said abortions could go ahead based on the "good faith judgment" of a medical professional that an individual would be "unlikely to survive."

But what if a doctor performs an abortion that a court later decides wasn't absolutely necessary? Under current state law, that could mean a sentence of life in prison. Some Republicans want to go even further than that.

As writer Jessica Valenti noted, the Texas Republican Party has adopted a plank that effectively calls for people who perform or obtain abortions to be prosecuted and potentially sentenced to death. The party's platform urges lawmakers "to enact legislation to abolish abortion by immediately securing the right to life and equal protection of the laws to all preborn children from the moment of fertilization." That language was first added in 2022, Valenti reported, "after a lobbying effort by Abolish Abortion Texas," a group that refers to "preborn babies" as being "murdered," the punishment for which includes capital punishment.

"The fact that this platform could even be brought up for a vote is disturbing," Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-Texas, told reporters on Monday. "But it should remind us how extreme and out of touch Donald Trump's MAGA Republican Party has become. If we allow Trump to get to the White House, he will subject all women across this country to his agenda of revenge and retribution."

While boasting of his responsibility for state abortion bans, Trump, who appointed three of the six justices who overturned Roe v. Wade and previously endorsed punishing doctors who perform abortions and patients who receive them, has waffled on just how far he would go if he wins in November. Last month, the presumptive Republican nominee told an interviewer he was "looking at" allowing state bans on birth control, only to walk back the statement after criticism.

Miller, who ultimately received a single fetal abortion and give birth to a healthy son, said she's not confused about the former president's positions when it comes to women and reproductive rights. Trump won't make America great, she said, but he will make it more like Texas, subjecting millions more Americans to the sort of abortion restrictions that now cover a third of the U.S. population.

Should he win in November, according to Miller, "he will make this nightmare a reality nationwide."

 

[Not a bee]

I don't understand what the doomed twin's hydrocephalic condition (even if it was severe enough to be incompatible with life) caused this woman to "vomit for 36 straight hours," or why this condition would cause the woman to be in mortal danger herself. I can easily understand how it could cause danger to the other remaining twin, which is an interesting issue in medical ethics certainly.

But I don't even see a way this woman's story is on the level. Typically a fetal abnormality doesn't cause "risk of organ damage to my kidneys and brain," unless they're basically arguing "twins are inherently more risky than a singleton and one won't make it anyway so yeet it."

Can one of our resident doctor types please explain what, if any, conditions in a fetus would result in the mother's life being in particular jeopardy?

Usually the argument here about fetal deformity is "the baby will have horrible quality of life," but this woman is making a very specific claim I've never seen advanced about deformities. Clarification needed.

Not really related with twins in particular, but women with preeclampsia it is life threatening to continue with the pregnancy. (Twins seems to be a higher risk for it too?)
I don't want to PL and I feel bad for doing so, but a relative had preeclampsia and one of the twins didn't make it so she had to do emergency c-section at 26w. It was really scary for both mom and baby.
It is a very real thing and it is something people should look out for.

 

[Sniperwoof]

Why do women and specifically American women want the nightmare dystopia from a Handmaiden's Tale to be real so badly?

Are incel weirdos right? Does the female psyche long for the comfort of slavery?

I really really don't understand this, it's fucking unhinged behavior.

 

[Otterly]

what, if any, conditions in a fetus would result in the mother's life being in particular jeopardy?

Not a doctor, maybe we have a obgyn on here who can say better but … The hyperemesis is likely just related to the twins - it’s more common in twin pregnancies.
The main risk is to the other twin. If they’re sharing a placenta and sac if one dies the other can be harmed or you’d go into pre term labour. It’s pretty common to lose a twin in the start of the pregnancy and up to a point they just re absorb and disappear , but in the second or third trimester it can kill or cause the other twin to be born very prematurely.
There is probably an increased risk of polyhydramnios but that’s rarely fatal and can be treated.
The main risk is the other twin is damaged and that risk is fairly significant. This is one of the cases where there probably IS a justification to terminate one of the twins, horrible though that may be. Abortion is always killing, is my opinion, and in a very few cases that’s the least worse option. It would be a very tough call to make and you’d probably want to monitor really closely, hope both made it to birth and be discussing what happens if the sick twin dies and the other one is healthy but won’t be soon after. Genuinely a hard call, don’t envy anyone going through that. Aborting the sick town can also damage the healthy one as well - if this was me I think I would be going for wait, monitor, of things go south save me and the healthy twin. Would t be much fun would it?
Grim to be using it as a political point.

 

[Brenda Holiday]

Why do women and specifically American women want the nightmare dystopia from a Handmaiden's Tale to be real so badly?

Are incel weirdos right? Does the female psyche long for the comfort of slavery?

I really really don't understand this, it's fucking unhinged behavior.

If it wasn't for this 1st world women wouldn't have much else to complain about

 

[The Hardest R]

So you admit this is has never happened, it's pure fantasy. As real as Harry Potter.

All the shlickfic that gets consoomed has warped the mentality of the average foid here.

 

[Coldgrip]

ITT: A fujo seethes because her mom didn't abort her.

 

[Diana Moon Glampers]

Not a doctor, maybe we have a obgyn on here who can say better but … The hyperemesis is likely just related to the twins - it’s more common in twin pregnancies.
The main risk is to the other twin. If they’re sharing a placenta and sac if one dies the other can be harmed or you’d go into pre term labour. It’s pretty common to lose a twin in the start of the pregnancy and up to a point they just re absorb and disappear , but in the second or third trimester it can kill or cause the other twin to be born very prematurely.
There is probably an increased risk of polyhydramnios but that’s rarely fatal and can be treated.
The main risk is the other twin is damaged and that risk is fairly significant. This is one of the cases where there probably IS a justification to terminate one of the twins, horrible though that may be. Abortion is always killing, is my opinion, and in a very few cases that’s the least worse option. It would be a very tough call to make and you’d probably want to monitor really closely, hope both made it to birth and be discussing what happens if the sick twin dies and the other one is healthy but won’t be soon after. Genuinely a hard call, don’t envy anyone going through that. Aborting the sick town can also damage the healthy one as well - if this was me I think I would be going for wait, monitor, of things go south save me and the healthy twin. Would t be much fun would it?
Grim to be using it as a political point.

But that's not what the mom claims.

She says she herself, the mother, was in danger. She names specific organs. She says her life was at risk.

And that's (this is what we're getting at here) a lie, unless literally all twin pregnancies could be pared down with this law to make them a little lower risk.

She's exaggerating the impact to herself as a strategic move, knowing that saying "but the baby's quality of life," which would always have been the justification before now, is understood by the state but not seen as a valid reason for abortion.

So she's trying to make us think there are fetal deformities that will put your life at risk, you, the woman reading this, and the state won't let you do a thing about it. Women are making permanent decisions about things like sterilization over the hysterics, and they're not even for real things or conditions that exist. Women are making choices with "informed consent" that is misinformed by both sides, who will literally say or do anything to advance their agendas.

No one will give them the full and fair picture of risks and possibilities. That's the one thing no one will bother doing for pregnant women. Just let them look at the actual risk picture. If analysts with glasses in the corporate offices of your local hospital system or your health insurance carrier wanted to know the exact risk of specific procedures or conditions, they could learn it. You, the patient, cannot be trusted with real information. Actual information is for closers.

 

[Otterly]

No one will give them the full and fair picture of risks and possibilities. That's the one thing no one will bother doing for pregnant women. Just let them look at the actual risk picture

Yeah I agree. This is a genuinely awful situation for any pregnant woman to be in - one of your babies is definitely going to die, what you want to know is the chances of, and the best way to, get you and the surviving twin through safely.
Would be PL to detail but not all of mine were straightforward (nothing like this thankfully) and the lack of information and solid risk data drove me insane.
I dont know if there’s any specific extra risk from anencephaly versus any situation where one twin is likely to not make it. There will be a risk to the mother if one twin dies and a multiple pregnancy is slightly higher risk as it is. I suppose infection would be a possibility but if you’re being monitored closely they should be able to keep things going ok?
Sense is out of the window with all this, it’s purely using emotional hooks to drive emotional reactions for peoples ideologies. And it works

 

[Sergeant Major Buzzkill]

No it’s okay you fuck no one has to deal with this everythhing is based lol you faggots

Take your meds, nigga.

 

[blablabla]

/pol/rapefugees seethe about women aborting literally brainless fetuses because they wouldn't be alive if their moms made the same choice.

kill yourself

 

[TapewormSalesman]

Assuming one twin is fine and the other one is fucked, can humans even naturally miscarry the dead one and leave the other one intact, the way that cats can?

 

[General Emílio Médici]

Fellas gotta admit, I was wrong.

I came into the thread dead sure it was Android Raptor who posted it. I was mistaken.

Anyway, worthless scaremongering propaganda. Trump in title (despite him being one of the LEAST pro-life Rs in decades whose opinion is "states decide, fuck off"), Salon publisher and the "source" was literally given a podium to speak from by the DNC.

 

[Android raptor]

Assuming one twin is fine and the other one is fucked, can humans even naturally miscarry the dead one and leave the other one intact, the way that cats can?

No, but humans have created ways to abort the fucked up fetus and leave the healthy one alone. It's called selective termination and this isn't the first case of Texas refusing it for a woman with serious medical issues and a fetus with lethal anomalies (that threatened her life as well as the healthy fetus).

If it was really about saving fetuses, you'd think prolifers would be all for allowing abortion of a doomed fetus to save its healthy twin, instead of both fetuses potentially dying as well as the mom.

 

[Prokhor Zakharov]

Why didn't the doctors confer with the hospitals in house legal counsel?

Because lawyers know shit about medicine and can't use a crystal ball to define untested areas of the law.

If you can't get an abortion in your location, go to another location where you can.

Not possible in some cases as a result of medical instability of the mother.

I don't understand what the doomed twin's hydrocephalic condition (even if it was severe enough to be incompatible with life) caused this woman to "vomit for 36 straight hours," or why this condition would cause the woman to be in mortal danger herself. I can easily understand how it could cause danger to the other remaining twin, which is an interesting issue in medical ethics certainly.

But I don't even see a way this woman's story is on the level. Typically a fetal abnormality doesn't cause "risk of organ damage to my kidneys and brain," unless they're basically arguing "twins are inherently more risky than a singleton and one won't make it anyway so yeet it."

Can one of our resident doctor types please explain what, if any, conditions in a fetus would result in the mother's life being in particular jeopardy?

Usually the argument here about fetal deformity is "the baby will have horrible quality of life," but this woman is making a very specific claim I've never seen advanced about deformities. Clarification needed.

Impending fetal demise would cause all of the symptoms she was talking about. Mirror syndrome is also possible if the hydrops (inappropriate fluid accumulation in a given compartment) involves at least two compartments. HELLP syndrome is also possible if the fetus in distress was causing an acute inflammatory syndrome. The only solution for all three is abortion or delivery.

 

[Netizennameless]

I can't see how someone could be held liable for an abortion after the fact if their decision was based on the best information available at the time. In an emergency situation you have to make immediate decisions that may or may not be the most optimal in hindsight, but you don't have the luxury of hindsight when seconds matter.

It'd be difficult to argue this for a civil malpractice suit, let alone for a criminal charge.

Now you know how the police feel.

In reality, these laws are only going to catch the most egregious cases. The "no exception for rape or incest" portion of the law is there to get rid of the incentive for a woman to falsely accuse the father of rape in order to get an abortion.

 

[Otterly]

but humans have created ways to abort the fucked up fetus and leave the healthy one alone. It's called selective termination

It’s not without risk in and of itself though. Amd it’s not always possible. Assuming the mother wanted the healthy twin to live, which she clearly did, there’s a whole assessment needed on the risks of leaving everything alone and waiting or terminating the sick twin. Selective termination carries with it a significant risk of total miscarriage. They will need to weight up things like the stage of pregnancy, are the twin mono or dichorionic? Is there any sign of twin to twin transfusion? Any sign of infection etc? In a lot of cases, the risk to the healthy twin AND the mother is lower with just watchful waiting and delivering both babies at the usual time. It would depend on a lot of stuff not detailed in this article.

The process seems to have worked here - she had the baby who could survive and she was able to terminate the sick one, and she was lucky that worked and did no harm to the surviving twin. She has ended up with the best outcome from a very sad situation.

 

[Sweetie Kitty]

I don't understand what the doomed twin's hydrocephalic condition (even if it was severe enough to be incompatible with life) caused this woman to "vomit for 36 straight hours," or why this condition would cause the woman to be in mortal danger herself. I can easily understand how it could cause danger to the other remaining twin, which is an interesting issue in medical ethics certainly.

But I don't even see a way this woman's story is on the level. Typically a fetal abnormality doesn't cause "risk of organ damage to my kidneys and brain," unless they're basically arguing "twins are inherently more risky than a singleton and one won't make it anyway so yeet it."

Can one of our resident doctor types please explain what, if any, conditions in a fetus would result in the mother's life being in particular jeopardy?

Usually the argument here about fetal deformity is "the baby will have horrible quality of life," but this woman is making a very specific claim I've never seen advanced about deformities. Clarification needed.

Going off what I know, when the mother of the twins specifically mentions her kidneys getting damaged that isn’t actually all that abnormal for high risk pregnancies. I‘d venture to guess the mother had a preexisting kidney condition she wasn’t aware of prior and this tipped it over the edge, or she was aware, became pregnant, and this exasperated the problem. She likely also had preeclampsia. Hyperemesis can absolutely obliterate your kidneys too.

The thing about kidneys is that they’re pretty fucking fragile and pregnancy puts a hell of a strain on them. Hyperhydrosis/fluid retention on top of the added material they need to filter out kind of makes for a bad time. There’s a pretty strong correlation between women who have kidney disease and high risk pregnancy. So to answer your question it likely wouldn’t be one specific fetal condition putting strain on her body. Even if her babies were perfectly healthy she could still have these exact complications- though I don’t doubt a fucked up fetus would add a lot of strain as well. The odds in this case just seemed stacked against her having a smooth pregnancy.

 

[isalaide]

Yeah I agree. This is a genuinely awful situation for any pregnant woman to be in - one of your babies is definitely going to die, what you want to know is the chances of, and the best way to, get you and the surviving twin through safely.
Would be PL to detail but not all of mine were straightforward (nothing like this thankfully) and the lack of information and solid risk data drove me insane.
I dont know if there’s any specific extra risk from anencephaly versus any situation where one twin is likely to not make it. There will be a risk to the mother if one twin dies and a multiple pregnancy is slightly higher risk as it is. I suppose infection would be a possibility but if you’re being monitored closely they should be able to keep things going ok?
Sense is out of the window with all this, it’s purely using emotional hooks to drive emotional reactions for peoples ideologies. And it works

If a twin dies in utero, I think the only course of action to prevent sepsis in the mother is to yeet both and put the survivor into neonatal care. I might be wrong, but IIRC this is what a friend of a friend was told.

The risk of that applied to the circumstances in OP is that she gets two cabbages: one hydrocephalus case and another one brain damaged due to significant prematurity. The chances of saving one normal baby might have been better if they did a selective termination on the hydrocephalus and let the other one cook.

 

[Otterly]

The chances of saving one normal baby might have been better if they did a selective termination on the hydrocephalus and let the other one cook.

I’m not sure it’s always possible to do that (can you do it if they share sac a/o placenta? I’m not sure…)
Really this is the kind of situation where a termination is the lesser evil, and it’s why medical type exemptions should be there. There will always be awful cases like this where you have to do some harm to save the mother or another child.
The issue is that then being used as a wedge to make it a free for all up to birth for any pregnancy by choice, which is just wrong imo.
Seems like there needs to be better guidelines and training so that doctors can act on medical need rather than political.

 

[Android raptor]

It’s not without risk in and of itself though. Amd it’s not always possible. Assuming the mother wanted the healthy twin to live, which she clearly did, there’s a whole assessment needed on the risks of leaving everything alone and waiting or terminating the sick twin. Selective termination carries with it a significant risk of total miscarriage. They will need to weight up things like the stage of pregnancy, are the twin mono or dichorionic? Is there any sign of twin to twin transfusion? Any sign of infection etc? In a lot of cases, the risk to the healthy twin AND the mother is lower with just watchful waiting and delivering both babies at the usual time. It would depend on a lot of stuff not detailed in this article.

The process seems to have worked here - she had the baby who could survive and she was able to terminate the sick one, and she was lucky that worked and did no harm to the surviving twin. She has ended up with the best outcome from a very sad situation.

And if she didn't have the funds to go to a different state, the outcome could've been much worse.

This shit is why the government has no business micromanaging the organs of girls and women.