Kentucky woman seeking court approval for abortion learned her embryo no longer has cardiac activity
Kentucky woman seeking court approval for abortion learned her embryo no longer has cardiac activity
A pregnant woman in Kentucky who filed a lawsuit demanding the right to an abortion has learned her embryo no longer has cardiac activity, her attorneys said Tuesday.
A pregnant woman in Kentucky who filed a lawsuit demanding the right to an abortion has learned her embryo no longer has cardiac activity, her attorneys said Tuesday.
The plaintiff’s attorneys signaled their intent to continue the challenge to Kentucky’s near-total abortion ban, but did not immediately comment on what effect the development would have on the lawsuit.
The complaint was filed last week in a state court in Louisville. The plaintiff, identified only as Jane Doe, was seeking class-action status to include other Kentuckians who are or will become pregnant and want to have an abortion. The suit filed last week said she was about eight weeks pregnant.
The flurry of individual women petitioning a court for permission for an abortion is the latest development since Roe v. Wade was overturned last year. The Kentucky case is similar to a legal battle taking place in Texas, where Kate Cox, a pregnant woman with a fatal condition, launched an unprecedented challenge against one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the U.S.
You're viewing a single thread.
is it still an abortion if the fetus died?
This is the exact problem with these bans. The medical procedure in question (dilation and curretage) can be and is used in cases with a fetus in any condition. The same procedure can be used for an elective abortion, a medically necessary abortion, or even to complete a miscarriage that is already underway.
The "abortion" procedure would have saved Savita Halapanavar's life. I personally know three women who were in similar circumstances, losing a lot of blood during miscarriages that weren't completing on their own.
You can't ban medical procedures that have valid use cases. These things are most properly regulated by medical professionals themselves.
Abortion is the name of the medical procedure. So removing a dead fetus is still an abortion.
If you have to have these laws they should specifically target elective abortions. Not the medical procedure in general.
Just to be 100% clear I don't support abortion bans in any form. Just pointing out blanket banning a medical procedure is fucking outrageous.
If you have to have these laws they should specifically target elective abortions. Not the medical procedure in general.
I understand you are just playing devil's advocate here, but even this is a bad idea. As we've seen in Texas, the law isn't designed for nuance, it is designed to attack women. The Texas law was supposed to have exceptions for health and safety of the woman/fetus, and we saw how that played out. Having a law that specifically targeted elective abortions would have the same problem where the state would undoubtedly put the burden of proof on the woman. "Oh, your baby has no heartbeat? Fill out this form in triplicate, get your doctor to sign it, have it notarized, and your abortion will be approved in 38 - 40 weeks."
The answer is "whichever answer results in the most suffering."