╌>

20 women are now suing Texas, saying state abortion laws endangered them

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  hallux  •  7 months ago  •  79 comments

By:   Selena Simmons-Duffin - NPR

20 women are now suing Texas, saying state abortion laws endangered them

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Cristina Nuñez's doctors had always advised her not to get pregnant. She has diabetes, end-stage renal disease and other health conditions, and when she unexpectedly did become pregnant, it made her extremely sick. Now she is suing her home state of Texas, arguing that the abortion laws in the state delayed her care and endangered her life.

Nuñez and six other women   joined an ongoing lawsuit   over Texas's abortion laws. The plaintiffs allege the exception for when a patient's life is in danger is too narrow and vague, and endangered them during complicated pregnancies.


The case was   originally filed in March   with five patient plaintiffs, but more and more patients have joined the suit. The total number of patients suing Texas in this case is now 20 (two OB-GYN doctors are also part of the lawsuit). After a   dramatic hearing in July , a district court judge agreed with the plaintiffs that the law needed to change, but the state immediately   appealed her ruling   directly to the Texas Supreme Court. That move allows Texas'   three overlapping abortion   bans to stand.

In the July hearing, lawyers for the Texas Attorney General's office argued that women had not been harmed by the state's laws and suggested that their doctors were responsible for any harms they claimed.

For Cristina Nuñez, after she learned she was pregnant in May 2023, her health quickly worsened, according to an amended complaint filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the organization bringing the case. Nuñez had to increase the amount of time she spent in dialysis, and suffered from painful blood clots. She told an OB-GYN that she wanted an abortion, but was told that was not possible in Texas. She called a clinic that provides abortion in New Mexico, but was told she could not have a medication abortion because of her other health conditions.


Her health continued to deteriorate as the weeks went on and her pregnancy progressed. In June, when one of her arms turned black from blood clots, she went to a Texas emergency room. She was diagnosed with a deep vein thrombosis, eclampsia and an embolism, but the hospital would not provide an abortion. She worried she would die, the complaint says.

She finally received an abortion 11 days after going to the E.R., only after finding a pro-bono attorney that contacted the hospital on her behalf.

Also joining the lawsuit is Kristen Anaya, whose water broke too early. She became septic, shaking and vomiting uncontrollably, while waiting for an abortion in a Texas hospital. The other new plaintiffs are Kaitlyn Kash, D. Aylen, Kimberly Manzano, Dr. Danielle Mathisen, and Amy Coronado, all of whom received serious and likely fatal fetal diagnoses and traveled out of state for abortions.

The Texas Supreme Court is set to consider the Center's request for a temporary injunction that

would allow abortions in a wider range of medical situations. That hearing is scheduled for Nov. 28.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
1  seeder  Hallux    7 months ago

Women, as many a male (though not enough) has learned, have long memories ... very long memories.

This kind of shyte just ain't goin' to sell: ("In the July hearing, lawyers for the Texas Attorney General's office argued that women had not been harmed by the state's laws and suggested that their doctors were responsible for any harms they claimed").

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1  devangelical  replied to  Hallux @1    7 months ago

[removed]

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Hallux @1    7 months ago
Women, as many a male (though not enough) has learned, have long memories ... very long memories.

If you imagine men are driving the anti-abortion bus, you have never been to Texas.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
1.2.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2    7 months ago

Who do you think is driving it?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.2  Jack_TX  replied to  Hallux @1.2.1    7 months ago

Evangelical women.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.2    7 months ago

Wait until one of them needs a medically necessary abortion.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.2.4  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.3    7 months ago

they're always ready with plenty of one-off justifications for themselves...

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
1.2.5  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.2    7 months ago
Evangelical women.

Are these ladies aware that funding the IDF indirectly covers the annual 15,000 free abortions in Israel?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.6  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.3    7 months ago
Wait until one of them needs a medically necessary abortion.

I don't argue that.

Just realize, it's all about the women.

This is 100% a religious movement, and like ALL religious movements, it is driven by women.  Women represent a substantial majority of regular churchgoers, and easily half of the men are only there because their wives want them to go.

So this idea that "women have long memories".... yeah... they do.... but don't think for a minute that they all support abortion.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Hallux @1.2.5    7 months ago
Are these ladies aware that funding the IDF indirectly covers the annual 15,000 free abortions in Israel?

Probably not.  If they did they wouldn't care. 

Since when did we start expecting zealots to make sense?  Do we normally hold women accountable for any views they hold, even if they are completely incongruent?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
1.2.8  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.7    7 months ago

You might want to look at this study done by the Pew:

It still looks like the majority of people are for choice.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.9  Jack_TX  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.2.8    7 months ago
It still looks like the majority of people are for choice.

You just linked to a study that says exactly only 45% of adults in Texas favor legal abortion.

In any case, tell it to the church ladies.  They're running the show. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.10  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.6    7 months ago
but don't think for a minute that they all support abortion.

They don't support it for ME or MY DAUGHTER or MY GRANDDAUGHTER that's for goddamn sure.

I've met some of these so-called evangelicals that are against abortion...but they've had at least one. I call them hypocritical

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.7    7 months ago
Do we normally hold women accountable for any views they hold, even if they are completely incongruent?

Of course we do! You have seen the comments about women like Large Marge and Boebert, haven't you?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.12  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.10    7 months ago
I call them hypocritical

Call them what you like.

Just understand, the majority of force behind the movement is female.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.13  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.12    7 months ago

I call bullshit

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.14  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.13    7 months ago
I call bullshit

It's a free country.  

Are you a member of an evangelical church?  How often do you attend?  What do you actually know about it?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.15  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.14    7 months ago

the last word is yours

and no...I wouldn't be caught dead in an evangelical church and I know quite a bit about them since I went to one when I was a kid. And I'm surrounded by the assholes here in Arkansas.

No need to respond unless you absolutely, positively, have to have the last word

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Expert
1.2.16  Krishna  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2    7 months ago
you have never been to Texas

Who do you think has never been to Texas?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Professor Quiet
1.2.17  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @1.2.15    7 months ago

Tell you what.. I'll make you a deal....

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
1.2.18  Trout Giggles  replied to  Krishna @1.2.16    7 months ago

I lived in Texas for 6.5 years. I'm familiar with it and its people. And then I moved next door to Arkansas. Not a whole lot of difference

I know what I'm talking about

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.2.19  cjcold  replied to  Jack_TX @1.2.2    7 months ago
Evangelical women.

You're half right. It's evangelicals of both sexes.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
1.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Hallux @1    7 months ago

"when she unexpectedly did become pregnant"

Yep that seems to be the usual excuse.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    7 months ago

Excuse?

What woman would go through and risk her life and that only to have an abortion or possibly lose her life if she doesn't??????

 
 
 
CB
Professor Principal
1.3.2  CB  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    7 months ago

If she say she didn't plan to get pregnant then she didn't. Because Greg, as you can imagine a real girl/woman with proper working sexual reproductive organs can get pregnant by accident-because their organs are EFFICIENT.  What you are implying has no basis, nevertheless. Because she knew enough to know that with her particulars medically she could not carry a child to term. 

So what's the problem? The proLIFE movement is so sold on the notion that we should all live like prolifers that it can painfully kill us?

That's insanity!

Only a fool would laid down and die for a pro-life cult!

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
1.3.3  Thrawn 31  replied to  Greg Jones @1.3    7 months ago

As usual it is somehow all the woman’s fault. The onus is ALWAYS on women to not get pregnant for some people, while completely excusing or ignoring the male contribution.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
1.3.4  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Thrawn 31 @1.3.3    7 months ago

The male contribution is the 'sacredness' of his seed.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2  Just Jim NC TttH    7 months ago
Cristina Nuñez's doctors had always advised her not to get pregnant. She has diabetes, end-stage renal disease and other health conditions, and when she unexpectedly did become pregnant, it made her extremely sick

Seems to me that would call for an immediate Tubal Ligation at least as long as she was going to remain sexually active.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
2.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2    7 months ago

We have a few things in common, one of which is neither of us is a doctor.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Hallux @2.1    7 months ago

Don't have to be a doctor to figure out that, as she has found out, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Measures could/should have been taken to ensure it never happened as long as it would not have had adverse ramifications on her health.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    7 months ago

Seems like her doctors, knowing the severity of her condition, would have encouraged her to not get pregnant.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    7 months ago

You would be surprised at hard it is to get a tubal, especially if you are a woman of child bearing years and have never had a child. You would think that an OB-GYN would recommend a tubal for a woman with her health problems but there just aren't enough female OB-GYNs around to make that recommendation. There's a member here who has gong thru this very thing with her daughter. Her daughter shouldn't have children but it was a fight for her to get a tubal. A lonnngggg fight

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.2    7 months ago

They did..............but nothing else to prevent it the way it sounds

Cristina Nuñez's doctors had always advised her not to get pregnant.
 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.3    7 months ago
You would be surprised at hard it is to get a tubal, especially if you are a woman of child bearing years and have never had a child. Y

I know. They always fear you will change your mind and want to have a child. I know someone close who went through the same thing.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.4    7 months ago

How do you know that she didn't take measures to not get pregnant, and got pregnant anyway?jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.7  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.3    7 months ago

revoking all federal taxpayer credits for church contributions should take care of the abortion debate pretty quickly. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.7    7 months ago
revoking all federal taxpayer credits for church contributions should take care of the abortion debate pretty quickly

That dream will not be coming true.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
2.1.9  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.3    7 months ago

Even with a tubal, 1 in 200 women will still get pregnant and many of those with an ectopic pregnancy; toss in her multiple disorders and she would likely be pushing up Texas bluebonnets within a year or so.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.10  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @2.1.6    7 months ago

If she did then she should be suing the drug maker or condom manufacturer NOT the State of Texas.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Hallux @2.1.9    7 months ago

Well then I guess they may have had to go one step further. Even though that is to the extreme.......

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.12  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.10    7 months ago

Nope.  She is suing the right scumbags.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @2.1.9    7 months ago

Texas doesn't care obviously when they banned abortion.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.11    7 months ago

Extreme? Remaining celibate?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.1.15  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.14    7 months ago

Um no. Hysterectomy

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.16  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.15    7 months ago

yeah...that is extreme.

I was actually kidding

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.17  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.8    7 months ago
That dream will not be coming true.

sooner than you think it will be, if thumper scum keep wandering off church property and don't learn to mind their own f'n business.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
2.1.18  mocowgirl  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.14    7 months ago
Remaining celibate?

Damned difficult because human biology ensures that we pursue sex for pleasure instead of just being receptive to sex when we are fertile.

Several decades ago, a woman acquaintance told me that a man could be replaced with a polished piece of wood.  I told her I had not reached that level of dissatisfaction with my male partner at that point.  LOL!

Seriously, masturbation should be encouraged as a healthy alternative to sex with a partner.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.19  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.17    7 months ago

I have heard similar things for 50 years.

Still waiting.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.20  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.19    7 months ago

practicing xtians are no longer in the majority in america. learn to live with that fact.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
2.1.21  afrayedknot  replied to  devangelical @2.1.20    7 months ago

“…practicing xtians…”

…if only practice made perfect…

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.20    7 months ago

I have never claimed otherwise.

Why are you trying to argue a point no one is even attempting to make?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.23  devangelical  replied to  afrayedknot @2.1.21    7 months ago

I should probably amend that to "regular church attendees" since in reality I don't consider a large percentage of certain church members anything close to be considered xtian.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.24  devangelical  replied to  Texan1211 @2.1.22    7 months ago

who's arguing? show me where I'm arguing with you.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.25  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.24    7 months ago

Well, if you aren't arguing some point no one else is even talking about, it makes the post senseless!

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.26  devangelical  replied to  devangelical @2.1.24    7 months ago
show me where I'm arguing with you.

again...

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Expert
2.1.27  Gordy327  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.1    7 months ago

And sometimes it happens despite measures. What difference does it make anyway?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.28  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @2.1.26    7 months ago

so senseless it was!

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2    7 months ago

When and where did you get your medical degree?  And really, what business is it of yours?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tessylo @2.2    7 months ago

Same as you..............in both cases. That's how an open forum works.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
3  mocowgirl    7 months ago

Why does the "pro life" crowd not care if the pregnancy is killing the woman?  

Why does a potential life matter more than an actual life?

In some cases, the fetus is dying and yet the "pro life" crowd will allow the putrid, decaying fetus to endanger or kill the woman rather than allow the medical abortion necessary to save the woman's life.

There is NOTHING "pro life" about this.  It regulates a woman to incubator status - nothing more than a machine.

The men/women who legislate reproductive rights are playing dictator in women's lives.  There are NO logical reasons that this should have ever been allowed.  

A woman's mental and physical health decisions should be between her and her doctor.  NEVER between her and her Senator, Representative, her neighbor, and/or someone forcing their manmade religious doctrine on her.  Even the Goatherder's Guide to Existence And Eternal Bliss or Damnation does not ban abortion.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
3.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  mocowgirl @3    7 months ago

Why? Control.

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
3.1.1  mocowgirl  replied to  Hallux @3.1    7 months ago
Why? Control.

I generally always Follow the Money.  

The US economic model is based on an ever-increasing number of wage slaves, consumers, and cannon fodder.

Also, until fairly recently, the Catholic Church used to force unwed mothers into giving up their babies.  The babies were then sold to the highest bidder and legally called adoption.  

I could google and cite references, but if anyone doubts the atrocities the RCC has imposed on mankind the past two thousand years, and continue to impose, then they can either educate themselves or not.

 
 
 
Hallux
PhD Principal
3.1.2  seeder  Hallux  replied to  mocowgirl @3.1.1    7 months ago

This should boil your blood:                      

The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World

Catherine Nixey  

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
3.1.3  mocowgirl  replied to  Hallux @3.1.2    7 months ago
This should boil your blood:                      

The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World

Catherine Nixey  

Yep.  Another book about the actual history of using the time proven effective combination of religious superstition, violence and torture to control the masses.  

When I was a teenager, reading "Rosemary's Baby" gave me nightmares.  Now it is the actual history of barbaric men that I shun if I want peace of mind.

Living in the Bible Belt as a believer was very difficult for me as I was far too "liberal" in my thinking process.  As an atheist (living in the Bible Belt), I have become a recluse to save my sanity and my life such as it is.

Actually, it just makes me sad and frustrated that so few men have the mentality (called psychopathy) to completely control and ruin so many lives in every community and country.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2  Tessylo  replied to  mocowgirl @3    7 months ago

The hardest decision a woman has to make is hers and no one else's

 
 
 
mocowgirl
Professor Quiet
3.2.1  mocowgirl  replied to  Tessylo @3.2    7 months ago
The hardest decision a woman has to make is hers and no one else's

Amen.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Expert
3.2.2  Gordy327  replied to  Tessylo @3.2    7 months ago

I have sometimes asked, how is a woman's pregnancy and health decisions anyone else's business or concern? Not surprisingly, any answer I get, if at all, is usually quite sanctimonious and/or emotional in nature, but without actually answering the question. 

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Junior Quiet
3.2.3  afrayedknot  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.2    7 months ago

“ I have sometimes asked, how is a woman's pregnancy and health decisions anyone else's business or concern?”

Indeed.

In fact, that question should preface every discussion on the subject, for it cannot be countered without interjecting a personal bias and/or religious tenet. 

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Expert
3.2.4  Gordy327  replied to  afrayedknot @3.2.3    7 months ago

This is true.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.2.5  devangelical  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.2    7 months ago

apparently their god forgot to impose appropriate boundaries on his gift of free will, so they did...

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
3.2.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  devangelical @3.2.5    7 months ago

Thanks for the value added.

 
 
 
charger 383
Professor Silent
3.2.7  charger 383  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.2    7 months ago

I have asked that, too and never received a good answer because these is not one

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.8  Tessylo  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2.6    7 months ago

No thank you for nothing

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Junior Expert
3.2.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.8    7 months ago

Huh?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
3.2.10  Right Down the Center  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.2.9    7 months ago

Would the double negative make it thank you for everything?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
3.2.11  Right Down the Center  replied to  Tessylo @3.2.8    7 months ago
No thank you for nothing

Would the double negative make it thank you for everything?

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Senior Guide
4  Right Down the Center    7 months ago

The plaintiffs allege the exception for when a patient's life is in danger is too narrow and vague, and endangered them during complicated pregnancies.

If this is true it should be changed.  A law like this needs to be very specific with very little to be left to interpretation.  And if it is too vague I would think some doctors would do it and end up in court anyway.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
4.1  Thrawn 31  replied to  Right Down the Center @4    7 months ago

Frankly it needs to be left up to the doctor and the patient. A bunch of male, and they are almost 100% male, politicians frankly have no fucking clue what they are talking about when it comes to this issue and should have zero say in the matter.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
Professor Guide
5  Thrawn 31    7 months ago

Silly silly women, don’t they know the anti abortion crowd doesn’t give a shit about them or their health? The whole point of restricting access to abortion is to start forcing women back into the house and out of mainstream public life. Putting women back into their proper biblical place as it were. 

 
 

Who is online



46 visitors