Tag: texas abortion ban
In Her Own Words: Why This Doctor Fled Texas To Help Women In Virginia

In Her Own Words: Why This Doctor Fled Texas To Help Women In Virginia

Dr. Lou Rubino is just one of many physicians who’ve left Texas as a result of the state’s multiple abortion bans—laws that prevent doctors from treating pregnant women with not just abortion care, but life-saving emergency care. She’s now practicing in Virginia.

Dr. Rubino told her story to writer Bonnie Fuller for Dogwood.

I remember very clearly the moment I knew I was done. I could no longer practice as a women’s health care doctor in Texas.

I had a patient, probably 18 or 19 years old. I was doing an ultrasound, and she told me she needed an abortion for her safety. She said, “I’m too young. I don’t feel safe with my partner. I’m scared. I need an abortion.”

When a patient tells me they feel unsafe with a partner, I take that very seriously. Pregnant people are at high risk of harm from abusive partners. It’s a dangerous time. She knew what she needed, and I knew it was wrong for me to say no.

She was very early in her pregnancy, between six and eight weeks. I should have been able to prescribe abortion pills or perform a quick five-minute procedure. Instead, I had to tell her she could not get care in Texas. I explained she’d have to travel nearly nine hours to the nearest clinic.

She cried, and I cried. I told her this was wrong, that her rights were being violated, and that I couldn’t let her believe she was the one at fault. After that, I knew I couldn’t go on. I put down my things, walked out, and decided to leave Texas for good.

I asked myself: Am I the kind of doctor who does the wrong thing?
I’m not. And Texas couldn’t force me to be.

Not long after, my husband and I moved to Virginia, where I now practice.

‘I moved to Austin for something different’

I’m originally from Detroit and went to medical school at Southern Illinois University. I moved to Austin in 2015 for something different, met my husband, and did my residency at UT Southwestern in Dallas.

At first, I didn’t think of abortion as a political issue. But quickly, I realized that without abortion and miscarriage training, I’d be ignoring an essential part of women’s health.

Miscarriages are common—about 15 percent of pregnancies end that way. Abortions are also common—one in four women will have one. To ignore that would mean I wasn’t fully trained.

In Texas, there was no formal abortion training. Instead, I apprenticed with an OB-GYN in Austin and learned to perform medication abortions and procedures up to 18 weeks. I became the main doctor at the Austin Women’s Health Center for several years, and I loved it. Providing a safe abortion can completely change someone’s life.

Then came the bans. After Senate Bill 8 passed in 2021, prohibiting abortions after six weeks, I began making plans to leave. I didn’t want to abandon my patients, but I also knew the state was stripping me of my job and my oath as a physician. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, Texas’s trigger ban outlawed abortion from conception.

I realized I couldn’t protect my staff while breaking the law. The day I had to turn away that young patient made me understand: By following the law, I was doing the wrong thing medically. I walked out of the clinic for good.

‘We get anti-abortion patients coming in for abortions, too’

I took work in Virginia and eventually helped open Meadow Reproductive Health and Wellness Clinic in McLean, just outside Washington, D.C. I’m now its medical director. We provide abortions up to 15 weeks and hope to expand to 18 when we grow our staff. About 20 percent of our patients come from out of state—often driving through the night from places like Florida, Georgia, or Alabama. Some bring children because they don’t have childcare. We started stocking microwaveable meals because a lot of people can’t afford food while traveling.

Every out-of-state patient has a story of desperation—needing time to gather money, arrange childcare, or escape an abusive partner. Too many people who need abortions aren’t getting them at all.

Now, in Virginia, I can practice the way I was trained. I no longer have to wonder whether my medical advice could land me in court. In Texas, at one point, I even asked myself, “Am I supposed to follow state laws or a tweet from the attorney general?”

I understand at a really fundamental level that the most basic human right is bodily autonomy. Without the right to control your pregnancy, you don’t have it. And without good reproductive health care, you risk your quality of life—or your life itself.

We get “anti-abortion” and deeply religious people coming in for abortions, too. They come to us for the same reasons anyone does: financial hardship, health risks, education, safety. They’re human, too.

I was nervous to tell my conservative grandmother in Tennessee about my work. But when I did, she surprised me. She said: “If someone needs an abortion, I’d want you to be the one doing it. I’m glad you’re doing that.”

Leaving Texas has been a relief. Here in Virginia, I can focus on patients and provide care in the right ways—medically, safely. You see, I took an oath as a doctor and I take it very seriously.

From the editor: How abortion bans are impacting Virginia and its neighbors

Abortion bans in Southern states have compelled expert doctors like Dr. Lou Rubino to relocate to Virginia, where laws allow medical professionals to provide essential reproductive health care. Clinics such as Meadow Reproductive Health and Wellness now serve not only Virginians, but also a growing number of women traveling from states where access is restricted—including Texas. These patients often arrive after long and difficult journeys, seeking safe and legal abortion care that is increasingly unavailable closer to home.

Reprinted with permission from VaDogwood.

Texas Abortion Law Would Have Forced Me To Watch My Baby Die

Texas Abortion Law Would Have Forced Me To Watch My Baby Die

Eighth-generation Texan Megan Bond recounted the stories of her dangerous pregnancies to COURIER Texas writer Bonnie Fuller. Here’s what happened, in her own words:

I feel bad for anyone who was in the medical office at the time I and my husband learned that our second desperately wanted baby was suffering from the same fatal fetal anomaly, bilateral renal agenesis, as our first baby.

This wasn’t supposed to happen. We had been told that there was only a one percent chance that we could have a second baby with bilateral renal agenesis, a condition in which your baby develops with no kidneys and no lungs so it will suffocate just after birth.

I was 15 weeks pregnant and had just had my anatomy scan. As my husband, Kevin, and I watched the technician, we could see for ourselves on the ultrasound screen that our baby boy, Teddy, had no amniotic fluid around him inside my womb.

We knew that meant that he had no kidneys, like our first baby, Keith, who we had made the very difficult decision to abort, because he was going to die right after birth.

We had learned through this first heartbreaking experience that kidneys are necessary to produce a fetus’s amniotic fluid. Without amniotic fluid, it’s impossible for a baby’s lungs to develop.

Even though we had now seen that Teddy’s little body was not surrounded by amniotic fluid, we were hoping against hope that we were wrong, as we waited in utter silence for the maternal fetal medicine specialist to come in and see us.

Every second waiting was agony.

Then she came in and confirmed the worst possible news—our second precious baby wouldn’t survive.

Time just stood still. My scream was irrepressible. Emotions just took over.

My husband and I hadn’t even told our parents that I was pregnant. But now we couldn’t put it off. We had to call and tell them the news immediately—both that I was pregnant, and that I was losing this new much longed-for baby.

I had first met Kevin when I was 30. We were married in October of 2022 and by the fall of 2023, after trying to conceive, we learned that we would have to go through IVF (in vitro fertilization) in order to have a family.

Happily, we were able to make seven embryos and when we transferred our first embryo it took, which was fantastic.

We found out that we were going to have a little boy as our first child, and I knew that I wanted to name him Keith after my paternal grandfather.

That was one of the best moments of my life—when I told my dad and he cried, knowing that his dad’s name was going to live on.

We got the happy news about my pregnancy two days before Christmas, so we were able to tell everybody during our Christmas celebrations that we were pregnant. Can you imagine a better gift than telling your parents that they would be grandparents?

And oh my gosh, everybody cried.

Not surprisingly, when we were at our first anatomy scan at 17 weeks, Kevin and I were very excited. We were watching our baby move around and we were looking at his heartbeat. We didn’t know that anything was wrong until our maternal fetal medicine specialist came in and told us.

She explained that our son had no kidneys, which meant that there was no amniotic fluid around him, and with no amniotic fluid his lungs couldn’t develop.

This meant that he would be crushed in utero without the amniotic fluid, and then if he did survive until birth he would suffocate because his lungs wouldn’t work, and it would be incredibly painful for him.

I knew immediately that the decision I would make was to terminate the pregnancy with an abortion. I could take on my baby’s pain so he wouldn’t have to do it.

Later, we talked to other doctors about our son’s condition but every one of them said the same thing: No baby with this diagnosis had ever survived.

Learning about our options

Before this happened to us, I was only vaguely aware of the abortion laws in Texas. I just knew that the law was terrible and that you couldn’t get an abortion in Texas.

What happened after the maternal fetal medicine specialist told us about the fatal diagnosis for Keith is all kind of a blur.

I do know that I immediately asked: “What can we do about this?” And her answer was, “Nothing.”

I also asked if, in our case with this diagnosis, I could end the pregnancy in Texas and she said, “No, in Texas your only option is to carry to term.”

Then I asked if it was legal somewhere else. I could tell that she was very hesitant to respond, but she did say yes.

I realize that she stopped talking because she was afraid and I don’t blame her. I don’t hold any grudges because there is so much at stake for doctors.

My husband and I were in complete shock after we found this out. We had had a healthy pregnancy. I had counted down the weeks of the first trimester knowing that’s when most of the miscarriages happen.

The invitations to a baby shower that my best friend was going to hold had already gone out two days before. We actually received it in the mail two days after we got the deadly diagnosis for Keith.

When Kevin and I got to the parking lot after the anatomy scan, we just bawled in each other’s arms.

Then we told our parents. I don’t know how Kevin drove home.

I was not mentally able to do the research to figure out what to do. Luckily, my dad’s a retired physician so he knew what to look for. He found us a clinic in Denver that could get us in before I reached their 20-week cutoff.

My parents, despite learning that their only grandbaby wasn’t going to survive, were there to support us, find us all comfortable places to stay, and come with us to the clinic.

We really were lucky despite the terrible situation, because we had full support from both sides of our family. No one was questioning our decision. No one was making us feel guilty, which is not the situation for a lot of women.

At the clinic in Denver…and after

The staff at the clinic were all so kind and knowledgeable. They said all the right things.

It was a two-day procedure and they let my husband be there as much as possible, including during the termination procedure, which I’m sure was incredibly difficult for him.

At first it was too overwhelming for Kevin and me to think about trying to get pregnant again. But about three months later, we decided to try with another of the embryos we had made during our IVF treatment.

We were told by all the doctors that we consulted that having another baby with bilateral renal agenesis would be like having lightning strike twice.

We had six embryos left, and our IVF doctors told us they were excited for us to try again. That we were going to be parents.

I got pregnant right away again, but we were so nervous we didn’t tell our parents this time. After what we had just been through with Keith and the abortion, we were really robbed of the joy of pregnancy. The joy of being optimistic.

We couldn’t plan a nursery. The first time I got pregnant, my husband went out and bought a ton of maternity clothes for me because he was so excited. But this time, neither of us did anything to prepare.

After we got the devastating news that I was losing a second baby to the same fatal fetal anomaly, we decided that we had to get the best genetic expert counseling that we could.

My IVF doctor recommended that we consult with Dr. Mark Evans in New York City. We wanted to see him before undergoing the second abortion, so we could do an amniocentesis procedure and get full genome testing.

We were desperate to learn why this had happened to us twice, especially when it was such a rare condition and we had no history of kidney issues in our families.

He spent four hours with us and was so empathetic. He explained everything that he was doing and answered all our questions but all the tests he did turned up nothing that could have caused the bilateral renal agenesis in our babies.

Unfortunately, there is nothing we can look at or test for in future pregnancies to prevent it.

We had to fly from New York City back to Colorado for a second procedure, where my parents met us again to provide support. I don’t even remember how we got back to Texas—it’s such a blur.

‘I think Texas’s abortion bans are cruel’

I think Texas’s abortion bans are cruel. The decision to have an abortion should be between a mother, whoever she wants to consult, and her very qualified team of professionals who spend years studying.

I think people should have autonomy to make their own decisions.

I don’t think politicians, with no medical experience, should be making decisions about abortion. They aren’t even listening to what doctors are saying.

Essentially I believe in smaller government. But this is big government. This is government getting involved in people’s personal lives and making decisions for them.

One of the first reactions I had to the news that the Texas law would force me to carry a doomed baby to birth was: “How do I sue the state?” No one should have to leave their state to get medical care to terminate a pregnancy.

We were very fortunate. We found a good clinic to go to. We had flexible jobs so we could take time off. In fact, I’m the CEO of a small business. We also had parental support and we could afford to do all of this. It probably cost us $10,000.

But how many people have $10,000 sitting around?

I don’t want people who aren’t in our situation to have to carry a baby to term and not have a choice. We had the choice available to us to leave Texas, but very few people do.

My goal is to get Republican lawmakers who control the Texas legislature to add an exception to the abortion bans for lethal fetal anomalies. That’s not saying that fighting the laws should stop there, but I am wary about how much I and other advocates will be able to do in this state. But this is what I can do in my situation.

When I tell my story, people are convinced. They don’t believe that women should have to carry a baby that has a fatal fetal anomaly and will die right after birth, like Keith and Teddy would have.

They agree that an abortion under this circumstance should not be illegal. Even my most right wing friends or people that I talk to who are “pro life” think there should be an exception to the abortion law for fatal fetal anomalies.

I know it’s going to be very hard to get things to change in Texas. People aren’t educated on the issues and people just go and vote Red all the way down the line.

After Keith died I wrote to every single politician in the state whose email address I could find. I also wrote to the members of the state Supreme Court.

However, the only response I got was a form letter from one legislator telling me that they were “doing all we could to protect unborn children.”

My letters had fallen on deaf ears.

I’m an eighth-generation Texan. I love my state, but my state doesn’t love me.

But I will still keep educating people. And now I have people advocating for me. They know my story and whenever they hear someone saying that stories about women being forced to carry babies that will die right after birth are fake, they explain to them that they are wrong and that this happened to Megan.

Despite everything we have been through, my husband and I still want to have a family, so we want to try again.

It’s a heavy decision to make knowing what potential pain we’re putting ourselves into. We really hope to have a family some day in the future—but we are more fearful every day about the fact that it is getting more and more difficult to safely have a family.

Bonnie Fuller is the former CEO and editor-in-chief of HollywoodLife.com and former editor-in-chief of Glamour, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, and USWeekly.

Reprinted with permission from Courier Texas.

Texas Banned Abortion -- Then Deadly Sepsis Among Pregnant Women Soared

Texas Banned Abortion -- Then Deadly Sepsis Among Pregnant Women Soared

Reprinted with permission from ProPublica

By Lizzie Presser, Andrea Suozzo, Sophie Chou and Kavitha Surana

Pregnancy became far more dangerous in Texas after the state banned abortion in 2021, ProPublica found in a first-of-its-kind data analysis.

The rate of sepsis shot up more than 50 percent for women hospitalized when they lost their pregnancies in the second trimester, ProPublica found.

The surge in this life-threatening condition, caused by infection, was most pronounced for patients whose fetus may still have had a heartbeat when they arrived at the hospital.

ProPublica previously reported on two such cases in which miscarrying women in Texas died of sepsis after doctors delayed evacuating their uteruses. Doing so would have been considered an abortion.

The new reporting shows that, after the state banned abortion, dozens more pregnant and postpartum women died in Texas hospitals than had in pre-pandemic years, which ProPublica used as a baseline to avoid COVID-19-related distortions. As the maternal mortality rate dropped nationally, ProPublica found, it rose substantially in Texas.

ProPublica’s analysis is the most detailed look yet at a rise in life-threatening complications for women losing a pregnancy after Texas banned abortion. It raises concerns that the same pattern may be occurring in more than a dozen other states with similar bans.

To chart the scope of pregnancy-related infections, ProPublica purchased and analyzed seven years of Texas’ hospital discharge data.

When abortion was legal in Texas, the rate of sepsis for women hospitalized during second-trimester pregnancy loss was relatively steady. Then the state’s first abortion ban went into effect and the rate of sepsis spiked.


Chart via Pro Publica

“This is exactly what we predicted would happen and exactly what we were afraid would happen,” said Dr. Lorie Harper, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist in Austin.

She and a dozen other maternal health experts who reviewed ProPublica’s findings say they add to the evidence that the state’s abortion ban is leading to dangerous delays in care. Texas law threatens up to 99 years in prison for providing an abortion. Though the ban includes an exception for a “medical emergency,” the definition of what constitutes an emergency has been subject to confusion and debate.

Many said the ban is the only explanation they could see for the sudden jump in sepsis cases.

The new analysis comes as Texas legislators consider amending the abortion ban in the wake of ProPublica’s previous reporting, and as doctors, federal lawmakers and the state’s largest newspaper have urged Texas officials to review pregnancy-related deaths from the first full years after the ban was enacted; the state maternal mortality review committee has, thus far, opted not to examine the death data for 2022 and 2023.

The standard of care for miscarrying patients in the second trimester is to offer to empty the uterus, according to leading medical organizations, which can lower the risk of contracting an infection and developing sepsis. If a patient’s water breaks or her cervix opens, that risk rises with every passing hour.

Sepsis can lead to permanent kidney failure, brain damage and dangerous blood clotting. Nationally, it is one of the leading causes of deaths in hospitals.

While some Texas doctors have told ProPublica they regularly offer to empty the uterus in these cases, others say their hospitals don’t allow them to do so until the fetal heartbeat stops or they can document a life-threatening complication.

Last year, ProPublica reported on the repercussions of these kinds of delays.

Forced to wait 40 hours as her dying fetus pressed against her cervix, Josseli Barnica risked a dangerous infection. Doctors didn’t induce labor until her fetus no longer had a heartbeat.

Physicians waited, too, as Nevaeh Crain’s organs failed. Before rushing the pregnant teenager to the operating room, they ran an extra test to confirm her fetus had expired.

Both women had hoped to carry their pregnancies to term, both suffered miscarriages and both died.

In response to their stories, 111 doctors wrote a letter to the Legislature saying the abortion ban kept them from providing lifesaving care and demanding a change.

“It’s black and white in the law, but it’s very vague when you’re in the moment,” said Dr. Tony Ogburn, an OB-GYN in San Antonio. When the fetus has a heartbeat, doctors can’t simply follow the usual evidence-based guidelines, he said. Instead, there is a legal obligation to assess whether a woman’s condition is dire enough to merit an abortion under a prosecutor’s interpretation of the law.

Some prominent Texas Republicans who helped write and pass Texas’ strict abortion bans have recently said that the law should be changed to protect women’s lives — though it’s unclear if proposed amendments will receive a public hearing during the current legislative session.

ProPublica’s findings indicate that the law is getting in the way of providing abortions that can protect against life-threatening infections, said Dr. Sarah Prager, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington.

“We have the ability to intervene before these patients get sick,” she said. “This is evidence that we aren’t doing that.”

A New View

Health experts, specially equipped to study maternal deaths, sit on federal agencies and state-appointed review panels. But, as ProPublica previously reported, none of these bodies have systematically assessed the consequences of abortion bans.

So ProPublica set out to do so, first by investigating preventable deaths, and now by using data to take a broader view, looking at what happened in Texas hospitals after the state banned abortion, in particular as women faced miscarriages.

“It is kind of mindblowing that even before the bans researchers barely looked into complications of pregnancy loss in hospitals,” said perinatal epidemiologist Alison Gemmill, an expert on miscarriage at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

In consultation with Gemmill and more than a dozen other maternal health researchers and obstetricians, ProPublica built a framework for analyzing Texas hospital discharge data from 2017 to 2023, the most recent full year available. This billing data, kept by hospitals and collected by the state, catalogues what happens in every hospitalization. It is anonymized but remarkable in its granularity, including details such as gestational age, complications and procedures.

To study infections during pregnancy loss, ProPublica identified all hospitalizations that included miscarriages, terminations and births from the beginning of the second trimester up to 22 weeks’ gestation, before fetal viability. Since first-trimester miscarriage is often managed in an outpatient setting, ProPublica did not include those cases in this analysis.

When looking at stays for second-trimester pregnancy loss, ProPublica found a relatively steady rate of sepsis before Texas made abortion a crime. In late 2021, the state made it a civil offense to end a pregnancy after a fetus developed cardiac activity, and in the summer of 2022, the state made it a felony to terminate any pregnancy, with few exceptions.

In 2021, 67 patients who lost a pregnancy in the second trimester were diagnosed with sepsis — as in the previous years, they accounted for about three percent of the hospitalizations.

In 2022, that number jumped to 90.

The following year, it climbed to 99.

ProPublica’s analysis was conservative and likely missed some cases. It doesn’t capture what happened to miscarrying patients who were turned away from emergency rooms or those like Barnica who were made to wait, then discharged home before they returned with sepsis.

Our analysis showed that patients who were admitted while their fetus was still believed to have a heartbeat were far more likely to develop sepsis.

“What this says to me is that once a fetal death is diagnosed, doctors can appropriately take care of someone to prevent sepsis, but if the fetus still has a heartbeat, then they aren’t able to act and the risk for maternal sepsis goes way up,” said Dr. Kristina Adams Waldorf, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at UW Medicine and an expert in pregnancy complications. “This is needlessly putting a woman’s life in danger.”

Studies indicate that waiting to evacuate the uterus increases rates of sepsis for patients whose water breaks before the fetus can survive outside the womb, a condition called previable premature rupture of membranes or PPROM. Because of the risk of infection, major medical organizations like the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists advise doctors to always offer abortions.

Researchers in Dallas and Houston examined cases of previable pregnancy complications at their local hospitals after the state ban. Both studies found that when women weren’t able to end their pregnancies right away, they were significantly more likely to develop dangerous conditions than before the ban. The study of the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, not yet published, found that the rate of sepsis tripled after the ban.

Dr. Emily Fahl, a co-author of that study, recently urged professional societies and state medical boards to “explicitly clarify” that doctors need to recommend evacuating the uterus for patients with a PPROM diagnosis, even with no sign of infection, according to MedPage Today.

UTHealth Houston did not respond to several requests for comment.

ProPublica zoomed out beyond the second trimester to look at deaths of all women hospitalized in Texas while pregnant or up to six weeks postpartum. Deaths peaked amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and most patients who died then were diagnosed with the virus. But looking at the two years before the pandemic, 2018 and 2019, and the two most recent years of data, 2022 and 2023, there is a clear shift:

In the two earlier years, there were 79 maternal hospital deaths.

In the two most recent, there were 120.

Caitlin Myers, an economist at Middlebury College, said it’s crucial to examine these deaths from different angles, as ProPublica has done. Data analyses help illuminate trends but can’t reveal a patient’s history or wishes, as a detailed medical chart might. Diving deep into individual cases can reveal the timeline of treatment and how doctors behave. “When you see them together, it tells a really compelling story that people are dying as a result of the abortion restrictions.”

Texas has no plans to scrutinize those deaths. The chair of the maternal mortality review committee said the group is skipping data from 2022 and 2023 and picking up its analysis with 2024 to get a more “contemporary” view of deaths. She added that the decision had “absolutely no nefarious intent.”

“The fact that Texas is not reviewing those years does a disservice to the 120 individuals you identified who died inpatient and were pregnant,” said Dr. Jonas Swartz, an assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Duke University. “And that is an underestimation of the number of people who died.”

The committee is also prohibited by law from reviewing cases that include an abortion medication or procedure, which can also be used during miscarriages. In response to ProPublica’s reporting, a Democratic state representative filed a bill to overturn that prohibition and order those cases to be examined.

Because not all maternal deaths take place in hospitals and the Texas hospital data did not include cause of death, ProPublica also looked at data compiled from death certificates by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

It shows that the rate of maternal deaths in Texas rose 33% between 2019 and 2023 even as the national rate fell by 7.5%.

A New Imperative

Texas’ abortion law is under review this legislative session. Even the party that championed it and the senator who authored it say they would consider a change.

On a local television program last month, Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said the law should be amended.

“I do think we need to clarify any language,” Patrick said, “so that doctors are not in fear of being penalized if they think the life of the mother is at risk.”

State Sen. Bryan Hughes, a Republican who once argued that the abortion ban he wrote was “plenty clear,” has since reversed course, saying he is working to propose language to amend the ban. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott told ProPublica, through a spokesperson, that he would “look forward to seeing any clarifying language in any proposed legislation from the Legislature.”

Patrick, Hughes and Attorney General Ken Paxton did not respond to ProPublica’s questions about what changes they would like to see made this session and did not comment on findings ProPublica shared.

In response to ProPublica’s analysis, Abbott’s office said in a statement that Texas law is clear and pointed to Texas health department data that shows 135 abortions have been performed since Roe was overturned without resulting in prosecution. The vast majority of the abortions were categorized as responses to an emergency but the data did not specify what kind. Only five were solely to “preserve [the] health of [the] woman.”

At least seven bills related to repealing or creating new exceptions to the abortion laws have been introduced in Texas.

Doctors told ProPublica they would most like to see the bans overturned so all patients could receive standard care, including the option to terminate pregnancies for health considerations, regardless of whether it’s an emergency. No list of exceptions can encompass every situation and risk a patient might face, obstetricians said.

“A list of exceptions is always going to exclude people,” said Dallas OB-GYN Dr. Allison Gilbert.

It seems unlikely a Republican-controlled Legislature would overturn the ban. Gilbert and others are advocating to at least end criminal and civil penalties for doctors. Though no doctor has been prosecuted for violating the ban, the mere threat of criminal charges continues to obstruct care, she said.

In 2023, an amendment was passed that permitted physicians to intervene when patients are diagnosed with PPROM. But it is written in such a way that still exposes physicians to prosecution; it allows them to offer an “affirmative defense,” like arguing self-defense when charged with murder.

“Anything that can reduce those severe penalties that have really chilled physicians in Texas would be helpful,” Gilbert said. “I think it will mean that we save patients’ lives.”

Rep. Mihaela Plesa, a Democrat from outside Dallas who filed a bill to create new health exceptions, said that ProPublica’s latest findings were “infuriating.”

She is urging Republicans to bring the bills to a hearing for debate and discussion.

Last session, there were no public hearings, even as women have sued the state after being denied treatment for their pregnancy complications. This year, though some Republicans appeared open to change, others have gone a different direction.

One recently filed a bill that would allow the state to charge women who get an abortion with homicide, for which they could face the death penalty.

Texas Abortion Ban Almost Killed A Young Woman -- Now She's Fighting Back

Texas Abortion Ban Almost Killed A Young Woman -- Now She's Fighting Back

“I can’t carry a pregnancy again,” Amanda Zurawski says sadly, but matter of factly. The Austin, Texas resident will never be able to carry a pregnancy again because she was refused a necessary abortion in her state after her water broke at 18 weeks, long before her baby would have been viable.

Tragically, the delay in receiving what used to be normal health care allowed a massive bacterial infection to develop and turn into life-threatening sepsis – which ravaged her body and reproductive organs.

But that’s what life is now like in the post-Roe world for pregnant women who run into serious pregnancy complications in Texas and 13 other Republican-led states. These states have all banned abortions with virtually no exceptions unless the mother is on the verge of death.

Amanda can thank Texas’s three draconian abortion bans for her own brush with death – and a future in which she can never risk pregnancy again. Amanda’s baby girl still had a heartbeat after her mom-to-be’s amniotic sac ruptured prematurely at 18 weeks – a condition called PPROM (premature rupture of the membranes) – so her doctor was not legally able to give her an abortion in Texas and was forced to send her home to wait.

What she awaited was the development and spread of an inevitable bacterial infection throughout her uterus and then her body. Amanda and her husband Josh had no choice but to sit nervously at home for three days while toxic bacteria grew, and then swiftly turned into a dangerous and damaging case of septic shock that ruined her reproductive organs. The sepsis also killed her fetus – and only then could an abortion be provided as a ‘medical emergency’ exception in Texas.

Before the procedure could be performed, Amanda twice went into septic shock, a condition that has a frightening 60 percent mortality rate. She only survived thanks to the heroic efforts of her doctors.

Now, the 36 year-old, an account manager in the tech industry, is the lead plaintiff in Zurawski v State of Texas and along with 21 other co-plaintiffs she is anxiously a decision from the Texas Supreme Court to decide whether it will ‘clarify’ the scope of the ‘medical emergency’ exceptions allowed under the state’s abortion bans.

Amanda’s journey, from grieving mom of a baby she had desperately wanted, to a lawsuit against the state of Texas, began as she lay in her hospital bed recovering from the physically and emotionally traumatic experience. After doctors had spent a grueling three days battling to save her life in the ICU, she and Josh began talking about what they could do to change Texas’s abortion laws so that other women wouldn’t suffer the horror she had been through.

“We were like – we need to do something immediately,“ she told the American Journal News in an exclusive interview. But the couple had no idea at the time that she would end up taking legal action against the state, let alone elevating it all the way up to the Texas Supreme Court.

She and Josh did realize, as she fought to regain her strength after undergoing an abortion, a blood transfusion and massive doses of antibiotics, that “as insane as it sounds, my scenario is the best version of this story because I had all the resources to survive sepsis,” she says.

She points out that she was lucky to have a devoted husband at home, ready to rush her to the emergency room as soon as her fever spiked and she became incoherent – which happened suddenly, three days after her water broke.

“But what about people who are at jobs, or who have other children and can’t find childcare, or don’t have a spouse that can get them to a hospital.They’re going to die. That’s going to be the outcome for a lot of people if things don’t change,” she fears.

She decided that she had a responsibility to tell her story. “If we don’t speak out, it’s not going to get better … so I really do feel like this is not where I want to be in life, but this is what life has dealt me. I feel very passionately that this is my duty. This is why I’m on earth – to fight this fight for so many.”

First, Amanda went public with her harrowing story, speaking to a media outlet and as word spread about her nightmarish experience, she was approached by lawyers from the Center for Reproductive Rights who wanted her to consider taking legal action. At first, she thought that the idea of suing the state of Texas was ‘‘madness”. But about five minutes into the meeting “my mind was changed. It was like, yeah, we’re doing this,’ she remembers. She says the center’s legal team “helped me see the importance of doing this.”

With full support from Josh, Amanda signed on to the lawsuit along with six other women who had been forced to give birth to infants that couldn’t survive outside the womb or who had to flee the state for abortions, as well as two plaintiffs who are obstetrician-gynecologists.

The OBGYNs joined in the legal action because the abortion ban ‘prevented them from meeting their ethical obligations as physicians and providing the medical care their patients needed’, according to the Zurawski v State of Texas lawsuit overview published by the Center For Reproductive Rights.

The suit was filed on March 6, 2023 and on May 22, eight more Texas women joined the groundbreaking case.

Amanda admits that she was nervous despite a lot of preparation before finally testifying in court when a hearing was held in a Texas state courtroom on July 19 and 20.

“I knew the state’s defense team was probably not going to be very nice. What I wasn’t prepared for was how excruciatingly detailed the questioning was going to be,” she admits. “They wanted me to recount very horrific pieces of my story. They wanted to know exactly when the baby’s heart stopped beating. It was just gruesome.”

The inhumanity of the trial got even worse when, she says, the Texas state defense team relentlessly tried to make the point that Amanda had “no standing” to challenge the abortion law because she probably couldn’t be pregnant again.

In other words, she and some of the other plaintiffs were in a cruel catch-22. They couldn’t be pregnant in the future because the Texas abortion law had taken away their fertility and now the state was saying that because they couldn’t give birth to a baby again, the law could no longer affect them, so they didn’t have the right to sue.

This was particularly brutal for Amanda, who was distraught that sepsis had left such massive scarring on her reproductive organs that both of her fallopian tubes were completely blocked and her uterus had collapsed. She and Josh had wanted a family so much.

Her reproductive endocrinologist was able to surgically unblock one of her tubes and he rebuilt her uterus in surgery after surgery. But it’s still not safe, she explains, for her to carry again because “my anatomy essentially has been permanently compromised.”

“How is that pro-life for my future children and my future family? How is what happened to some of the plaintiffs who joined my case? And their children? How is it pro-life that they had to be carried to term, and then they suffered for hours after being born and then slowly suffocated to death?” she asks, referring to Samantha Casiano, a fellow plaintiff whose baby suffered from anencephaly, a condition in which a baby doesn’t develop part of its brain and skull, and died shortly after birth. Samantha was denied an abortion and was forced to give birth to a daughter, “Halo”, who was immediately gasping for air and died within hours.

Despite the difficulty of testifying, Amanda says the experience was nevertheless “empowering,” because “there were so many of my fellow plaintiffs in that courtroom at the same time. We hadn’t been together before and just feeling our collective strength and determination to fight was amazing.”

Unfortunately, the joy of hearing the Texas district judge issue an injunction last August 4, blocking the Texas abortion bans as they apply to dangerous pregnancy complications, was extremely brief. The state immediately appealed the ruling under the direction of Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, a persistent opponent of reproductive choice for women.

Amanda’s next hearing was before the state Supreme Court on November 28. By then seven more Texas women had joined the lawsuit, so the plaintiffs now numbered 22. Although Amanda didn’t need to testify again, the courtroom experience wasn’t any less infuriating. One of the state’s lawyers didn’t even appear familiar with the terrible medical issues each of 20 of the plaintiffs had experienced, when they were denied abortions.

“It was very indicative of how the state [of Texas] feels about us. They don’t give us any sort of credibility. It really shows how they feel about the lives of pregnant people in Texas,” she points out.

“They just don’t care.”

Amanda says she was hopeful at first that Kate Cox, the Texas mom of two, pregnant with a baby suffering from a fatal condition which threatened her future fertility, would be considered a ‘medical emergency exception’ under the state’s restrictive laws. A federal district judge did rule that the 31 year-old was eligible for an abortion, but once again the state’s far-right Attorney General intervened.

Paxton immediately obtained an emergency injunction against the ruling, threatened to charge hospitals and any doctor who gave her the abortion with a felony, and then appealed the case to the Texas Supreme Court.

Amanda is disgusted with Paxton. “He’s essentially saying that he, who is not a medical doctor, knows more about medicine than actual medical doctors and he should be the one making these decisions,” she says. She laughs ironically when she’s asked if she feels like she’s living in a real life ‘Handmaid’s Tale’ in Texas. “It feels like I’m trapped in some sort of dystopian novel”.

Physicians and hospitals don’t dare violate Texas’s three strict abortion laws for some very clear reasons. Doctors face fines of up to $100,000, prison sentences of up to 99 years, and can also have their state medical licenses revoked. All of which explains why there have only been about 34 abortions performed in Texas — a state of almost 30 million people — since the bans were imposed. Before the three new abortion bans, there were more than 50,000 abortions a year in the state.

When the Texas Supreme Court denied Kate Cox an abortion, a disappointed Amanda told the American Journal News, “It’s so frustrating that we are no closer to giving doctors the clarity they need to help patients like me or Kate. Without clarity, people are left living in fear of prison or losing their livelihood.”

Kate Cox quietly fled Texas to get her medically necessary abortion.

Since the Zurawski v State of Texas lawsuit began, Amanda and Josh have lived through the sad anniversary of the loss of their beloved baby girl and her own emergency hospitalization.

She confesses that the year has been difficult for her husband Josh in a way that was different from her. “On the anniversary, I was obviously mourning the loss of our baby. But something he shared with me was that it was really difficult for him since he was not only mourning the loss of our baby but he was reliving that day and what it did to me. He lost a child and he almost lost his wife.”

She admits something that it is really sad and hard for her to share publicly. “Josh has already told some of our friends who are family planning, that as well as making a plan for when to try to have children, and a plan for where you are going to deliver and what’s going to be on your delivery playlist, now you also have to have a plan for what you’re going to do if things go south. How are you going to get out of the state if you need to?That’s the sad reality. It’s not something anybody wants to think about , but that’s the reality that our [Republican] lawmakers have put us in.”

Texas currently has a Republican Governor, two Republican U.S. senators, and Republicans control both the Senate and the House of Representatives in the state legislature.

With that in mind, Amanda hopes that by acting as the leading plaintiff in this lawsuit against Texas, that she is encouraging people to come out and vote in upcoming elections for the “right people”, who support a woman’s right to choose.

In the meantime, she awaits a decision from the Texas Supreme Court, which could clarify when the state’s doctors can legally provide abortions without repercussions.

Marc Hearron, the senior counsel for the Center for Reproductive Rights, who has represented both Amanda and Kate Cox, says he is feeling “cautiously optimistic that the court will provide more clarity.”

While he acknowledges that the judges appear to view “medical exceptions’ very narrowly,” he says they didn’t comment in Cox’s case on Constitutional arguments that the Center has put forward.

He points out that the Texas Constitution provides pregnant people with ‘a right to life’: “A Texan cannot be deprived of life and liberty.” There is also an equal protection clause in the state constitution and therefore “pregnant people deserve equal rights to other Texans”, he insists.

If the Texas Supreme Court rules against Amanda and her co-plaintiffs, there is unfortunately no more legal action that can be taken on their behalf, he explains. In that case, Hearron says that “the people of Texas have to put pressure on politicians and change who they elect. It’s in their hands.”

While waiting for the court’s decision, aside from using her voice, Amanda has honored her daughter along with her husband Josh, by naming her and memorializing her in a very special way.

“When Josh and I were in the hospital, we talked about whether to name her and I said it would be really nice to name her after a plant or flower or tree that we could plant in the yard of the new house we had just bought,” she says.

The couple decided on the name “Willow” since the Desert Willow is native to Texas, Weeping Willows are native to Indiana, the couple’s home state, and the meaning of the name is “strength.”

“We also felt that it was very fitting for us because you can take the roots of one willow and use those to plant new willows. So we like to think we’re going to take her roots to plant our future babies.”

Amanda reveals that because she can no longer support a pregnancy in her own uterus, that she and Josh have done a number of rounds of IVF and were thankfully able to create some embryos.

“We are hopeful that we will still have children, but will have to have somebody help us out with that,” she confided. “We’re hopeful we will have something exciting in 2024.”

Bonnie Fuller is the former CEO and editor-in-chief of HollywoodLife.com & former editor-in-chief of Glamour, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire & USWeekly. She is now writing about reproductive freedom and politics.

Reprinted with permission from American Journal News.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World