#emergency abortion exceptions

[femkethefaineant]

Also, I've said this before and I'll say it again: banning abortion makes pregnancy only more dangerous. Banning abortion kills babies. We've tried this in the past.

And the assumption that pregnancy is safe leads to the assumption that any pregnancy gone awry is somehow intentionally disrupted, which then leads to wild accusations.

I'm from the Netherlands, where in 1911 a law was introduced that made it illegal to give women any treatment which could induce a miscarriage, or that could kill an unborn or recently born baby. Thus, doctors refused to do so. This led to:

1. A new profession called 'angelmaker', meaning an amateur performing an abortion illegally. Using such tried and true and obviously safe methods as stabbing the uterus with a knitting needle. Note that the number of abortions did not go down, even if we count only those proven to be intentional.

2. A wave of suspicion. Anyone who was at some point suspected to be pregnant but then ceased to be without the appearance of a living baby, was looked into. So women tried to hide their pregnancy by doing stuff pregnant people should obviously not be doing. Anyone who interacted with the pregnancy before something went wrong was held responsible for the complications. Which then led to...

3. Known pregnant people being isolated. No doctors treatment, because the doctor could be accused of murder if anything went wrong afterwards. Oftentimes the family would actually blame the doctor, because someone was going to get blamed anyway and they didn't want it to be themselves. No social network for the same reason. And then if anything went wrong anyway, or more likely because of this, there were no witnesses to prove that the woman didn't do it on purpose. There are many stories of women being denied medical care, miscarrying, then being so distraught they do something irrational (destroying the body in attempts to bring it back to life, trying to hide the body in a forest, simply running away, etc.) that would then be used as proof that the woman did, in fact, kill the baby.

So banning abortion doesn't lead only to people who want an abortion getting one anyway. It also leads to pregnant people being denied any medical care while also being stressed out and alone. It leads to anyone who even looked at a potential miscarriage to be accused of murder, regardless of whether an abortion took place or not.

Banning abortion leads only to more dead babies.

I hate when people say “I’m against abortion except for if the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother” every single pregnancy threatens the life of the pregnant person. We’ve gotten too far removed from that, taken for granted that pregnancy is safe. It is not. Pregnancy and puerperal complications have been a fairly common cause of death throughout history. Even now, maternal mortality is on the rise in the US, the maternal mortality rate varies wildly across the states and it is disproportionately higher for Black women. Being pregnant is getting more dangerous, not less dangerous.

[amaditalks]

Abortion Is On The Ballot

In ten states, there are ballot measures or questions which will be decided in the November election which will impact the future of abortion access in those states. Here’s what you need to know.

Arizona

Arizona Proposition 139 the Right to Abortion Initiative will amend the state constitution to provide for the fundamental right to abortion that the state of Arizona may not interfere with before the point of fetal viability unless justified by a compelling state interest.

To enshrine abortion rights protection in the state constitution Vote Yes

Colorado

Colorado Amendment 79, the Right to Abortion and Health Insurance Coverage Initiative will amend the state constitution to create the right to an abortion and authorize the use of public funds (Medicaid) to pay for abortion care.

To enshrine abortion rights protection in the state constitution Vote Yes

Florida

Florida Amendment 4, the Right to Abortion Initiative, will amend the state constitution to declare that "no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” The current constitutional provision requiring parental consent for minors' abortions will not be affected.

To enshrine abortion rights protection in the state constitution and overturn the current six week abortion ban Vote Yes

Maryland

Maryland Question 1, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment, will amend the state constitution to establish a right to reproductive freedom, defined to include "the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy."

To enshrine reproductive rights protection in the state constitution Vote Yes

Missouri

Missouri Amendment 3, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative will amend the state constitution to provide the right for reproductive freedom, which is defined as "the right to make and carry out decisions about all matters relating to reproductive health care, including but not limited to prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, birth control, abortion care, miscarriage care, and respectful birthing conditions," and providing that the state legislature may enact laws that regulate abortion after fetal viability.

To enshrine broad reproductive rights protection including abortion in the state constitution and overturn the current complete abortion ban Vote Yes

Montana

Montana CI-128, the Right to Abortion Initiative will create a constitutional "right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion," and allow the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except when "medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient."

To enshrine broad reproductive rights protection including abortion in the state constitution Vote Yes

Nebraska

The Nebraska Prohibit Abortions After the First Trimester Amendment will amend the state constitution to elevate the current twelve week abortion ban law to a constitutional provision with limited exceptions for medical emergencies or in cases of rape.

To prevent the current legislative abortion ban from being enshrined in the state constitution Vote No

Nevada

Nevada Question 6, the Right to Abortion Initiative will amend the state constitution to create a constitutional right to an abortion, providing for the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except where medically indicated to "protect the life or health of the pregnant patient."

To enshrine abortion rights protection in the state constitution Vote Yes

New York

New York Proposal 1, the Equal Protection of Law Amendment will amend the state constitution to provide that people cannot be denied rights based on their "ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability" or "sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy."

To enshrine equal rights protection for pregnant people and abortion patients in the state constitution Vote Yes

South Dakota

The South Dakota Constitutional Amendment G, the Right to Abortion Initiative will amend the state constitution to protect the right to an abortion based on a trimester framework, with no restrictions permitted in the first trimester, only limited medical need restrictions permitted in the second trimester and allowing deeper restrictions in the third trimester except "when abortion is necessary, in the medical judgment of the woman's physician, to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman."

To enshrine abortion rights protection in the state constitution and overturn the state's current full abortion ban Vote Yes

If you live in one of these ten states and abortion rights matter to you, get registered or double check your registration and make your voting plan today. Every single vote matters significantly in amendment questions.

[stevetoday]

Pro-Choice - Abortion Measures on The Ballot

Florida Amendment 4, the Right to Abortion Initiative A Yes vote with 60% will Establish a constitutional right to abortion until viability, with exceptions for later pregnancies. Arizona Proposition 139, Right to Abortion Initiative (2024) A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to provide for the fundamental right to abortion, among other provisions.

Colorado Amendment 79, Right to Abortion and Health Insurance Coverage Initiative A  "yes" vote supports creating a right to abortion in the state constitution and allowing the use of public funds for abortion. Maryland Question 1, Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment A "yes" vote supports adding a new article to the Maryland Constitution's Declaration of Rights establishing a right to reproductive freedom, defined to include "the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one's own pregnancy."

Missouri Amendment 3, Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative A "yes" vote supports adding a fundamental right to reproductive freedom, defined to include abortion and “all matters relating to reproductive health care,” to the Missouri Constitution, among other provisions. Montana CI-128, Right to Abortion Initiative

provide a state constitutional "right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion," and

allow the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except when "medically indicated to protect the life or health of the pregnant patient."

Nebraska Initiative 434, Prohibit Abortions After the First Trimester Amendment A "no" vote opposes amending the state constitution to prohibit abortions after the first trimester unless necessitated by a medical emergency or the pregnancy is a result of sexual assault or incest.

Nebraska Initiative 439, Right to Abortion Initiative A "yes" vote supports amending the state constitution to establish a right to abortion until fetal viability. Nevada Question 6, Right to Abortion Initiative A "yes" vote supports providing for a state constitutional right to an abortion, providing for the state to regulate abortion after fetal viability, except where medically indicated to "protect the life or health of the pregnant patient." New York Proposal 1, Equal Protection of Law Amendment A "yes" vote supports adding language to the New York Bill of Rights to provide that people cannot be denied rights based on their "ethnicity, national origin, age, and disability" or "sex, including sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy."

South Dakota Constitutional Amendment G, Right to Abortion Initiative A "yes" vote supports providing for a state constitutional right to abortion in South Dakota, using a trimester framework for regulation:

During the first trimester, the state would be prohibited from regulating a woman's decision to have an abortion;

During the second trimester, the state may regulate abortion, but "only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman;" and

During the third trimester, the state may regulate or prohibit abortion, except "when abortion is necessary, in the medical judgment of the woman's physician, to preserve the life and health of the pregnant woman."

[reasonsforhope]

"Abortion will again be legal in North Dakota after a state court ruled yesterday [September 12, 2024] that the state’s near-total abortion ban is unconstitutional. The case challenging the ban was brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights and its partners on behalf of a North Dakota abortion provider and its physicians.

Abortion has been illegal in North Dakota since April 2023, when the ban took effect.   

“This is a win for reproductive freedom, and means it is now much safer to be pregnant in North Dakota,” says Meetra Mehdizadeh, staff attorney at the Center. “Hospitals and doctors no longer have their hands tied and can provide abortions to patients with complications.” 

According to the ruling, North Dakota’s abortion ban violates the state constitution due to its narrow and vague exceptions and because the ban violates the right to reproductive autonomy.  

The opinion by Judge Bruce Romanickstated, “The North Dakota Constitution guarantees each individual, including women, the fundamental right to make medical judgments affecting his or her bodily integrity, health, and autonomy, in consultation with a chosen health care provider free from government interference. This section necessarily and more specifically protects a woman’s right to procreative autonomy—including to seek and obtain a pre-viability abortion.”

[Note: In a delicious irony, this is probably one of the state constitutional amendments that passed as a "right to healthcare choice" in an effort to gut Obamacare. Whoops! Backfired! Source)

Tammi Kromenaker, Director of Red River Women’s Clinic, a plaintiff in the case, said, “Today’s decision gives me hope. I feel like the court heard us when we raised our voices against a law that not only ran counter to our state constitution but was too vague for physicians to interpret and which prevented them from providing the high-quality care that our communities are entitled to.” 

“Abortion is lifesaving health care; it should not be a crime. I look forward to a new future in North Dakota and hope our lawmakers will finally give up on their crusade to force pregnancy on people against their will,” added Kromenaker. 

The abortion ban will be enjoined in the coming days and the ruling is likely to be appealed...

The Center is currently litigating several more cases seeking to clarify the “medical emergency” exceptions under state abortion bans and to broaden the circumstances in which physicians can provide abortions. The cases were brought on behalf of physicians and dozens of women denied abortion care despite facing dangerous and severe pregnancy complications. Read about those medical exceptions cases here."

-via Center for Reproductive Rights, September 13, 2024

[destielmemenews]

"Missouri is currently enforcing a total abortion ban with exceptions for medical emergencies. The ballot measure's proposal to enshrine the right to abortion until fetal viability - typically around 24 weeks in pregnancy - drew support from 52% of Missouri voters in a St. Louis University/YouGov poll conducted from Aug. 9-16. The measure would need more than 50% support to pass."

source 1

source 2

source 3

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Amanda Marcotte at Salon:

After the Supreme Court ended federal abortion rights in 2022, there was a robust debate between pro- and anti-choice activists over whether or not banning abortion would kill women. Pro-choicers pointed to evidence, from both history and other countries, showing that abortion bans kill women. Anti-choice activists dismissed the record and pointed to toothless "exceptions" in abortion ban laws as "proof" that women could get abortions to save their lives.  The latter argument was frustrating not just because it was wrong but was generally offered in bad faith. Anti-abortion leaders know that abortion bans kill women. They don't care. Or worse, many view dying from pregnancy as a good thing. In some cases, it's viewed as just punishment for "sinful" behavior. Other times, it's romanticized as a noble sacrifice on the altar of maternal duty. But conservatives are aware that this death fetish cuts against their "pro-life" brand. So there was a lot of empty denials and hand-waving about the inevitable — and expected — outcome of women dying. 

We now have another proof point that abortion bans are about misogyny, not "life," as the first deaths from red state abortion bans are being reported. Instead of admitting they were wrong and changing course, Republicans are behaving like guilty liars do everywhere, and destroying the evidence. In the process, they are also erasing data needed to save the lives of pregnant women across the board, whether they give birth or not.  ProPublica has published a series of articles detailing the deaths of women in Georgia and Texas under the two states' draconian abortion bans. They most recently reported the death of Porsha Ngumezi, a 35-year-old mother of two from Texas. Ngumezi suffered a miscarriage at 11 weeks but was left to bleed to death at the hospital, instead of having the failing pregnancy surgically removed. Multiple doctors in Texas confirmed that hospital staff are often afraid to perform this surgery, however, because it's the same one used in elective abortions. Rather than risk criminal charges, doctors frequently stand by and let women suffer — or die.  Ngumezi's youngest son doesn't fully understand that his mother is dead. ProPublica reported that he chases down women he sees in public who have similar hairstyles, calling for his mother. 

A day after this story was published, the Washington Post reported that the Texas maternal mortality board would skip reviewing the deaths of pregnant women in 2022 and 2023 — conveniently, the first two years after the abortion ban went into place. The leadership claims it's about speeding up the review process, but of course, many members pointed out the main effect is that "they would not be reviewing deaths that may have resulted from delays in care caused by Texas’s abortion bans." This is especially noteworthy because it's become standard after one of these reports for anti-abortion activists to blame the victims and/or the doctors, and not the bans. Christian right activist Ingrid Skop, for instance, responded to Nguzemi's death by insisting "physicians can intervene to save women’s lives in pregnancy emergencies" under the Texas law. If she really believed that, however, she would desperately want the state maternal mortality board to review this, and other cases like it, so they could come up with recommendations for hospital staff to treat women without running afoul of the law. Strop, however, is on the Texas maternal mortality board. She was likely part of the decision to refuse to look into whether women like Nguzemi might be saved. 

[...] But despite claims to be "pro-life," anti-abortion activists do not care. Instead, they are on Twitter griping about how comprehensive reproductive health care access "promotes sexual promiscuity." 

Skop also argued last year that abortion bans are justified because "promiscuous behavior declines." It's tempting to point out that all five women whose deaths have been reported by ProPublica were in long-term relationships or marriages. Three of the five planned to bring their pregnancies to term and died because they were denied miscarriage care. But that's the problem with vague terms like "promiscuous." They draw us into debates about how much women are allowed to enjoy sex before their lives are forfeited. Or how many "good girls" should die to punish the "promiscuous" ones. That is the trap of misogyny. It allows women like Lila Rose or Ingrid Skop to pretend that, if you submit to the sexist order and obey all their arbitrary rules, you'll be saved. But these laws punish all women and girls: mothers and non-mothers, wives and single women, women who've had 100 partners and those who were virgins when raped. Abortion bans make crystal clear that, to the Christian right, no woman's life is worth saving. Anyone can be sacrificed, to protect their cruel patriarchal order. 

Want more reason why abortion bans are bad for women? Republicans are working hard to destroy the evidence that abortion bans kill women.

Abortion bans have zip to do with the "sanctity of life", but are a tool for misogyny.

[truth-has-a-liberal-bias]

But once the babies are here, the state provides little help.

When she got pregnant, Mayron Michelle Hollis was clinging to stability.

At 31, she was three years sober, after first getting introduced to drugs at 12. She had just had a baby three months earlier and was working to repair the damage that her addiction had caused her family.

The state of Tennessee had taken away three of her children, and she was fighting to keep her infant daughter, Zooey. Department of Children’s Services investigators had accused Mayron of endangering Zooey when she visited a vape store and left the baby in a car.

Her husband, Chris Hollis, was also in recovery.

The two worked in physically demanding jobs that paid just enough to cover rent, food and lawyers’ fees to fight the state for custody of Mayron’s children.

In the midst of the turmoil in July 2022, they learned Mayron was pregnant again. But this time, doctors warned she and her fetus might not survive.

The embryo had been implanted in scar tissue from her recent cesarean section. There was a high chance that the embryo could rupture, blowing open her uterus and killing her, or that she could bleed to death during delivery. The baby could come months early and face serious medical risks, or even die.

But the Supreme Court had just overturned Roe v. Wade, which guaranteed the right to abortion across the United States. By the time Mayron decided to end her pregnancy, Tennessee’s abortion ban — one of the nation’s strictest — had gone into effect.

The total ban made no explicit exceptions — not even to save the life of a pregnant patient. Any doctor who violated the ban could be charged with a felony.

Women with means could leave the state. But those like Mayron, with limited resources or lives entangled with the child welfare and criminal justice systems, would be the most likely to face caring for a child they weren’t prepared for.

And so, the same state that questioned Mayron’s fitness to care for her four children forced her to continue a pregnancy that risked her life to have a fifth, one that would require more intensive care than any of the others.

Tennessee already had some of the worst outcomes in the nation when measuring maternal health, infant mortality and child poverty. Lawmakers who paved the way for a new generation of post-Roe births did little to bolster the state’s meager safety net to support these babies and their families.

In December 2022, when Mayron was 26 weeks and two days pregnant, she was rushed to the hospital after she began bleeding so heavily that her husband slipped in her blood. An emergency surgery saved her life. Her daughter, Elayna, was born three months early.

Afterward, photographer Stacy Kranitz and reporter Kavitha Surana followed Mayron and her family for a year to chronicle what life truly looked like in a state whose political leaders say they are pro-life. [...]

[rapeculturerealities]

Pregnant Woman Declared Brain Dead Kept Alive Due to Abortion Ban

Smith was rushed to the hospital. A CT scan later revealed multiple blood clots in her brain. Doctors were planning to go into surgery, but it was too late. They declared Smith brain dead.

Now, due to the state abortion ban, Smith is being kept on life support.

“She’s been breathing through machines for more than 90 days,” Newkirk said. “It’s torture for me. I see my daughter breathing, but she’s not there. And her son — I bring him to see her.”

Newkirk said it’s been heartbreaking seeing her grandson believe his mother is “just sleeping.”

Georgia enacted a ban on abortion after six weeks gestation following the 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade. According to law, “no abortion shall be performed if the unborn child has a detectable human heartbeat except (a) in the event of a medical emergency or medically futile pregnancy.”

In the state, “medical emergency” is defined as “a condition in which an abortion is necessary in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or the substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.”

However, Smith's case is considered a legal gray area and doctors reportedly told her family that because she is brain dead, and no longer considered at risk, they are legally required to maintain life support until the fetus reaches viability.

Newkirk said they were told that the doctors are not legally allowed to consider other options.

[mariacallous]

To abortion opponents, a woman is nothing more than a vessel. This view is evident in the anti-abortion movement’s relentless pursuit of giving fetuses the same rights as human beings; in its dismissal of the inconvenient truth that abortion bans have killed pregnant people; in its refusal to support policies that would make it easier for Americans to choose to parent. This view was also embodied literally by Adriana Smith, a pregnant woman in Georgia whom a hospital kept alive for four months on a ventilator against her family’s wishes — all because of the state’s six-week abortion ban.

Smith’s family says doctors delivered her baby via emergency C-section on June 13. The baby, whom they named Chance, was born late in the second trimester; he weighed about one pound, 13 ounces, and is currently in the neonatal intensive-care unit. The family also said that Smith, who would have turned 31 years old this past weekend, was to be taken off life support on Tuesday.

When the news broke in May, Smith’s story became a monstrous new entry in the canon of post-Dobbs indignities and horrors.

The nurse and mother of one had sought medical help for intense headaches at a local emergency room in February, her mother, April Newkirk, told 11Alive. Doctors sent Smith home with some medication, but they did not perform a CT scan, according to Newkirk. The next day, Smith’s partner called 911 after she woke up gasping for air and making gargling sounds that the family attributed to possible internal bleeding. The hospital found Smith had multiple blood clots in her brain, and though doctors moved to perform a procedure that’d relieve the pressure, it was too late. Smith was declared brain-dead.

But because Smith was nearly nine weeks pregnant at the time, the hospital has kept her alive on breathing machines for months, according to Newkirk. She told 11Alive that the medical team said they have no other option due to Georgia’s laws, which prohibit abortions once fetal cardiac activity is detected, or around six weeks of pregnancy. While the law makes exceptions when the pregnant person’s life is in danger, Smith’s case falls in a legal gray area: She is brain-dead, which means her life is no longer considered at risk, and her doctors claim they are legally required to keep her body on life support until the fetus reaches viability, according to Newkirk. Representatives from Emory Decatur, where Smith was previously hospitalized, and Emory University Hospital, where she was later transferred to, told the Associated Press last month that the medical team “uses consensus from clinical experts, medical literature and legal guidance to support our providers as they make individualized treatment recommendations in compliance with Georgia’s abortion laws and all other applicable laws.”

Doctors initially planned to keep Smith’s body alive until the fetus could survive outside her womb, Newkirk told 11Alive in May. The medical team estimated that it’d happen around 32 weeks of pregnancy, and Smith’s pregnant body would be induced. But rather than inducing Smith’s body sometime in early August, as expected, doctors delivered Chance via emergency C-section this month.

“He’s expected to be okay,” Newkirk told 11Alive. “He’s just fighting. We just want prayers for him. Just keep praying for him. He’s here now.”

Newkirk had previously said it had been torturous to see her daughter breathing while knowing she is no longer really there. She added that she often takes her grandson to visit Smith, and the child believes his mother is sleeping.

“I’m not saying that we would have chosen to terminate her pregnancy,” she told 11Alive. “What I’m saying is that we should have had a choice.”

When Smith entered the hospital at nearly nine weeks’ gestation, the pregnancy was months away from being viable. The embryo would not have been visible to the naked eye, and the tissue would have fit within a petri dish at that time. But under Georgia law, the mere potential of that embryo to become a living, breathing child superseded the wishes of a family grieving their still breathing daughter. The horror that Smith’s loved ones are experiencing, having been robbed of the ability to choose how to handle her end-of-life care, lays bare how abortion opponents don’t just want to strip women of their dignity, humanity, and right to bodily autonomy: The blast radius engulfs their families and communities, too.

The financial burden Smith’s family is now facing on top of their prolonged emotional suffering is stunning in its cruelty. Not only have they been saddled with the cost of the many ongoing medical interventions needed to keep Smith’s body functioning, but they will also have to be responsible for a child who may face numerous health challenges if born. Her family set up a GoFundMe to help offset the costs. “He may be blind, may not be able to walk, may not survive once he’s born,” Newkirk previously told 11Alive. “This decision should’ve been left to us. Now we’re left wondering what kind of life he’ll have — and we’re going to be the ones raising him.”

Anti-abortion advocates spun this case as a matter of health providers misinterpreting the law, something they have done in every instance where a person has been irrevocably harmed or killed as a result of abortion bans. But make no mistake: These laws are working exactly as intended. Smith’s fate is a feature, not a bug. The anti-abortion movement imbues every fetus with nearly messianic potential while discarding the pregnant person carrying it as a nonentity. In life and in death, we’re just human incubators to them.

[deathmetalunicorn1]

Yandere Shiva family, Buddha, Apollo, and Loki house in love with their married best friends goddess. But here is the gist, the darling is getting fed up with her husband but she hides it well, even from them. But however, it would seem as though during the holidays cracks are beginning to show because the darling is about to hit the wall. Because sweetheart is just tired of unreciprocated and underappreciated Labor that comes with marriage or just a relationship in general.

Forgetting important events, fragilent promises that hardly get fulfilled ( Ex: was asked numerous times to plan her birthday and promised he would. Darling had to cancel her invite list since he fell through on his promise. ), being emotionally and mentally detached to her health concerns ( Ex: that being her overall well-being and infertility issues ), being pissed off when you aren't informed of things when you likely don't care about it( Ex: darling had to get an emergency abortion because of how dangerous the pregnancy she had at the time was, and it emotionally and physically drained her majorly. And yes the Yandere was there for both the procedure and when her husband blew up at her ), being even more pissy when your needs aren't met but can't even do the barest of bare minimum ( Ex: was asked to go get her meds; she still healing btw, he didn't get them. But later on he did ask if they can have sex, mind you darling isn't well enough to do that and you didn't even get her medicine. The darling obviously refused and gave him the reasons, and yet says " Well, your mouth still works right. ". This sparks an argument and yes the yanderes are present for this too. ), and just many more reasons ( and even more examples... ) as to why she's over it but those are the most recent.

By the holidays she has been ran thin too the last thread, and this is secretly her husbands last chance to redeem himself and revive the magic in their marriage. But like may things he fell through just as the darling is fell into the wall too. The darling swiftly and secretly makes a quick trip to Hera, get divorce papers from and blessing from her to proceed further, and neatly wraps them up as a lovely gift for her soon to be ex. So you can imagine the surprising ( or really unsurprising.. ) ' gift ' he got at Jesus's birthday party ( he's another friend of hers but not as close as the yanderes ). So what are the the Yanderes going to do on this unFORTUNATE turn of events, how are they going to react.

P.S the darling is the Goddess of Festivities, craft, home, beauty, and magic.

I’ll be doing all of this except for the miscarriage part- that’s too sad, but I will have something to make up for that part.

-You couldn’t help but smile as your husband was holding the present from you on his lap, it looked perfect, with beautiful wrapping paper and bows, it looked like something you would see in a magazine!

-It was a Christmas party you were having with all your friends, including (Love), who your husband didn’t like because he could see how (Love) looked at you, wanting you for his own, but you were a loyal person, you wouldn’t cheat, unlike him.

-Your husband had changed over the years you had been married to him, going from a sweet and kind man to someone that nobody in their right mind would marry- he cheated on you several times, gaslit you into forgiving him, and was an absolute pig to you! Not to mention he never remembered your anniversary or your birthday, but he expected to be treated like a king on his birthday and if he didn’t get that he would pout and lament at having such a heartless wife when you did everything for him.

-It wasn’t fair that such a wonderful person like you was being treated so poorly!

-(Love) knew this well, after you had been rushed to the hospital after one of your ovaries ruptured, your husband had ignored your cries for help, telling you that you were being too noisy, and (Love) rushed to your side when you called him for help.

-While you were in the hospital your husband came, demanding to know when you were coming home to cook and clean for him, as it was your job as his wife to take care of him, while you were still recovering from surgery.

-When you were finally home, despite being on strict bed rest orders, including no sexy time, your husband just whined and complained, saying you were being so selfish for not giving him what he wanted.

-You had friends over, including (Love) who were helping around the house while you were still healing, something you were grateful for, but your husband just complained, saying you were going to get lazy and was complaining that you weren’t doing your wifely duties in pleasuring him.

-You had snapped at him, surprising him, “One of my ovaries just popped, it’s like one of your balls popping- would you want to have sex while you’re in pain?” (Love) had been surprised by your anger, but your husband dug himself even deeper, “Well you have a mouth, don’t you?”

-(Love) enjoyed punching your husband that day, putting him in his place while screaming at him for treating you in such a way and for a while your husband did treat you better, afraid of (Love’s) wrath.

-When you were finally recovered and found him in bed with yet another nymph, you decided enough was enough and you went to Hera, telling her what happened, begging for her help with getting a divorce.

-Hera knew of what happened from (Love) who had been so furious about your husband’s actions that she had your divorce ready in minutes.

-However, you didn’t give it to your husband right away, you wanted to embarrass him like how he embarrassed you and you laid your plan in motion, gift wrapping the divorce papers.

-Now it was finally the day, and you could barely contain your excitement as your husband was admiring the lovely gift as you beamed, “That’s from me- I worked really hard on it!”

-(Love) was heartbroken, seeing you doing so much for someone who doesn’t cherish you as your husband looked smug, trying to rub it in the faces of everyone, especially (Love), “That’s my Y/N- always treating her husband how she should!”

-He opened the gift in front of everyone and instead of seeing a wonderful gift, his face fell as he picked up the divorce papers, which were already processed and signed by Hera.

-He looked over at you and you beamed brightly, standing up with your hands on your hips, “That’s right- I’m no longer your wife- you selfish, arrogant, stuck-up, pathetic excuse of a man! Merry Christmas! Enjoy your divorce papers!”

-Jaws dropped all around, eyes wide as they all realized what you did, but instead of feeling embarrassed of seeing something like this, your friends all immediately cheered, embarrassing your ex-husband even more as they all congratulated you for dropping a loser like him.

-You felt proud and happy, but also still a bit nervous as he looked up at you, trying to get your pity, “Y/N why are you doing this? How could you be so cruel?!”

-Your eyes were sharp and cold, “I’m cruel? You never remember my birthday, you ignore my concerns, you ignored me when I was in the hospital then embarrassed me in front of my friends, you never help out, you constantly cheat on me then act like it was my fault that you cheated- plus you’re a pig and you can’t take care of yourself! So why do you think I’m doing this?!”

-(Love) was on cloud nine, about ready to swoop in to snatch you away to love you until the end of eternity when your ex shot up, going to threaten you again when a new voice spoke up, “Sit down.” He turned, going to yell only to meet the sharp eyes of Hera who immediately had him melting into his seat, terrified of her.

-Hera turned to you, her icy façade melting as she beamed at you, “Congratulations on your divorce Y/N!��� you thanked her warmly as she turned back to your ex, threatening him to never go near you again.

-(Love) quickly slid up to you, beaming brightly, “Are you okay Y/N? Do you need anything?” you saw that he looked elated, and you couldn’t help but smile, taking his arm in yours, “Yes actually- I am in need of a date to the Christmas ball tonight. I wonder who I should take?”

-(Love) grinned down at you, hearing your tease as you and your friends all left your ex’s house, as you had already moved out without your ex realizing, mainly because he wasn’t paying attention as (Love) escorted you to your temporary home, as he was going to wife you yesterday, but he needed to be patient, at least until the end of the party to ask you, he was hoping that you will say yes!

-Your ex was left on the couch, alone, completely stunned that he had lost you- it was all his fault for the way he treated you- he was to blame as he cried bitterly into his hands. He had to win you back!

-It was going to be impossible however, seeing as (Love) wasn’t going to let him ever approach you again, he was never going to hurt you again, (Love) made this silent promise to you.

[tieflingkisser]

Mother Forced to Keep Pregnant Daughter Alive After She’s Declared Brain Dead Due to Abortion Ban: ‘It’s Torture’

from the article:

In early February, Adriana Smith — a 30-year-old mom and registered nurse — started experiencing intense headaches. She was about nine weeks pregnant so she visited a local hospital because the symptoms were “enough to know something was wrong.”

“They gave her some medication, but they didn’t do any tests. No CT scan,” Smith’s mother, April Newkirk, told 11Alive. “If they had done that or kept her overnight, they would have caught it. It could have been prevented.”

The following morning, Newkirk said Smith’s boyfriend found her gasping for air in her sleep, making gurgling noises which they believe was due to blood.

Smith was rushed to the hospital. A CT scan later revealed multiple blood clots in her brain. Doctors were planning to go into surgery, but it was too late. They declared Smith brain dead.

Now, due to the state abortion ban, Smith is being kept on life support.

“She’s been breathing through machines for more than 90 days,” Newkirk said. “It’s torture for me. I see my daughter breathing, but she’s not there. And her son — I bring him to see her.”

[...]

Georgia enacted a ban on abortion after six weeks gestation following the 2022 overturn of Roe v. Wade. According to law, “no abortion shall be performed if the unborn child has a detectable human heartbeat except (a) in the event of a medical emergency or medically futile pregnancy.”

In the state, “medical emergency” is defined as “a condition in which an abortion is necessary in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or the substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.” 

However, Smith's case is considered a legal gray area and doctors reportedly told her family that because she is brain dead, and no longer considered at risk, they are legally required to maintain life support until the fetus reaches viability. 

Newkirk said they were told that the doctors are not legally allowed to consider other options.

“I think every woman should have the right to make their own decision,” she said. “And if not, then their partner or their parents.”

[dhaaruni]

Activists absolutely have the blood of American women and girls on their hands

Arkansas has a total abortion ban right now (except for a narrow exception to save the woman's life in case of "medical emergency") so a 20-week ban is infinitely better than the status quo since fewer women and girls will suffer. This isn't rocket science!!

[tmblrplsdonutbanme]

I didn’t really see anyone on Radblr mentioning this, so I felt the need to bring it up. You have quite an audience, which makes this a good opportunity to educate someone who’s willing to learn.Conservatives often emphasize that anti-abortion laws still include exceptions, but they tend to overlook a very specific loophole. 'Abortion' among the general population doesn’t hold the same meaning as it does in medical contexts.In medicine, abortion is a treatment for any medical emergency that requires pregnancy termination. This includes molar pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, pregnancies with various complications, incomplete miscarriages, etc. Miscarriage is, by definition, a spontaneous abortion.Anti-abortion legislation denies women the most basic bodily autonomy.

although i didn't realize i had such an audience- by all means, ill post

i heard something funny, that if abortion is murder than miscarriage is suicide

Yes, life is precious. But for whatever reason, a woman's body is deemed as "less precious" than a barley duel-celled zygote that can't survive without it's own immune system, simply because it has none.

if a man had a testicular teratoma, is it "worth more"? No, because "worth" doesn't exist and any attempt to assign such is an socioeconomic fallacy

which is why, when a woman has something growing inside of her against her will, an attempt to override her life and choices by negligently prioritizing the unborn clump of cells is already a failure to uphold any "value" of life.

So when pro-lifers look at abortion as anything other than a medical life-altering procedure, that is more often than not, life saving- their actions show a disdain for life -ESPECIALLY if their jurisdiction goes against the woman's wishes, and of course, her life.

[ex-foster]

Foster kids being exclusively used as rhetoric in the abortion debate is a problem. We face discrimination due to this mindset.

I want to tell you a story about me trying to find resources after I aged out of foster care. This was during the covid pandemic where businesses were closing and times were uncertain. I went from working full time hours to suddenly only working 3 or 4 hours per week. I got nervous about my income and started planning for the worse (What if I can't make rent? What if I get evicted? What's going to happen to me?). So I called 211 to ask about possible emergency housing.

I spoke to a man who informed me that since the pandemic their shelters have been at 100% capacity. This was due to several factors including health regulations which required beds to be spaced further apart, which limited their capacity. Also when lockdowns and social distancing were enforced, there was a rise in substance abuse. People turned to alcohol and drugs to numb the pain of loneliness and anxiety during uncertain times. For some people this meant their addictions lead to job loss and they required emergency shelter.

I explained to the guy that my social worker told me that most foster kids end up homeless and he replied "yeah that's why I'm pro-choice". I was so taken aback by his reply that I said some very vulgar words and then hung up. He attempted to call me back and apologize. He said his coworker was also a former foster kid and they talked about our conversation but the damage was done. They lost my trust. How did it make any sense to make a comment like that? You are pro-choice because maybe decades after an unplanned pregnancy a global pandemic might cause homeless shelters to be overwhelmed?

Some people say the silent part out loud and say that the solution to foster care is us just not existing to begin with. Then there are others that discriminate against us because they have this mindset that foster kids are somehow different than other people.

On a separate occasion where I called 211 I again inquired about services available to former foster kids who aged out of care. The person on the other end wasn't able to think of any services that might be helpful for someone in that situation except for one program specifically for former foster youth between the ages of 18-21. I asked if there was anything besides that and he said "no, nothing". It's almost like these people forget that we are regular citizens that can also access the same services as other people that are not exclusive to former foster youth (for example a youth employment center). 211 is not trained on former foster youth.

Keep in mind that 211 services acknowledge other demographics like LGBT, disabilities, elderly, indigenous people, and immigrants/newcomers. You can google what services your 211 offers in your area and see for yourself. Now tell me why there isn't a category for former foster youth?

I see more resources for LGBT than for former foster kids. Why is there dedicated LGBT community groups and social clubs but nothing for former foster youth? Many former foster youth are lonely during the holidays but you're telling me there's "nothing" for them if they call 211? There are LGBT summer camps. There are LGBT mentoring programs. Our tax dollars go towards LGBT flags being painted on our crosswalks or printed on pins handed out by our libraries and schools. So you're telling me that foster kids should be aborted but "protect trans kids ✊🏻🏳️‍⚧️!"

You progressives are completely cherry picking who matters and who does not. You absolutely could put effort into activism for former foster youth but you choose not to. You see us as nothing more than political pawns for abortion and that's it. So I don't ever want to hear you hypocrites saying that Conservative pro-lifers "don't care about foster kids" because I see zero evidence that liberal pro-choicers care.

So before you open your mouth and try to use us as pawns in the abortion debate why don't you try to make our community more inclusive to FFY?

[reasonsforhope]

"Bria Peacock chose a career in medicine because the Black Georgia native saw the dire health needs in her community — including access to abortion care.

Her commitment to becoming a maternal health care provider was sparked early on when she witnessed the discrimination and judgment leveled against her older sister, who became a mother as a teen. When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, Peacock was already in her residency program in California, and her thoughts turned back to women like her sister.

“I knew that the people — my people, my community back home — was going to be affected in a dramatic way, because they’re in the South and because they’re Black,” she said.

But even though Peacock attended the Medical College of Georgia, she’s doing her obstetrics and gynecology residency at the University of California-San Francisco, where she has gotten comprehensive training in abortion care.

“I knew as a trainee that’s what I needed,” said Peacock, who plans to return to her home state after her residency.

Ever since the Supreme Court decision, California has worked to become a sanctuary for people from states where abortion is restricted. In doing so, it joins 14 other states, including Colorado, New Mexico, and Massachusetts. Now, it’s addressing the fraught issue of abortion training for medical residents, which most doctors believe is crucial to comprehensive OB-GYN training.

A law enacted in September [2023] makes it easier for out-of-state trainees to get up to 90 days of in-person training under the supervision of a California-licensed doctor. The law eliminated the requirement for a training license and also permitted training at programs such as Planned Parenthood that are affiliated with accredited medical schools.

“By allowing physician residents to come to California, where there are more opportunities for abortion training, and by allowing them to be reimbursed for this work, we’re sending a message that abortion care is health care and an essential part of physician training,” said Lisa Folberg, CEO of the California Academy of Family Physicians, which supported the bill.

The question of how to provide complete OB-GYN training promises to become more urgent as the effects of abortion bans on medical education becomes clear: 18 states restrict or ban abortion to the point of effectively stripping 20% of OB-GYN medical residents of the opportunity to get abortion training, according to the Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning. That’s 1,354 residents this year out of 5,962 OB-GYN residents nationwide.

The restrictions in some cases aim to reach beyond state borders, spooking medical students and residents who fear hostility from anti-abortion groups and right-wing legislators...

Pamela Merritt, executive director of Medical Students for Choice, pointed to a Kansas law that requires repayment of state medical school scholarships — with 15% interest — if residents perform abortions or work in clinics that perform them, except in cases of rape, incest, or a medical emergency.

Doctors point out that abortion training is not just about ending pregnancies. Peacock recalled a patient who started hemorrhaging badly shortly after a healthy delivery. Peacock and her team at UCSF performed a dilation and curettage — a procedure commonly used to terminate pregnancy.

“If we did not have that skill set, and the patient continued to bleed, it could have been life-taking,” said Peacock, chief OB-GYN resident at UCSF...

Peacock, for her part, is adamant about returning to Georgia, where abortions are banned after six weeks. “I’m still going to provide abortions, whether that’s in Georgia or I need to fly to a different state and work in abortion clinics for a week out of the month,” she said. “It would definitely be a big part of my work.”"

-via The 19th, January 2, 2024

[globalnewscollective]

The Deadly Consequences of Abortion Bans: Rising Sepsis Cases Among Pregnant Women

Restrictive abortion laws are not just a political talking point—they are a matter of life and death. A new PBS NewsHour report reveals a disturbing trend: an increase in life-threatening sepsis cases among pregnant women in states with strict abortion bans. This is not a coincidence. It is a direct consequence of laws that prevent doctors from providing essential medical care.

How Abortion Bans Lead to Sepsis

Sepsis is a life-threatening condition caused by the body’s extreme response to infection. In pregnancy, it often results from delayed or denied medical intervention. Here’s how abortion bans contribute to this crisis:

Delayed Treatment – Doctors in states with strict laws hesitate to act, fearing legal consequences. By the time they intervene, an infection may have already progressed to sepsis.

Forced Continuation of Dangerous Pregnancies – Women experiencing miscarriages or fatal fetal diagnoses are often forced to carry nonviable pregnancies, increasing their risk of infection.

Lack of Medical Exceptions – Some laws are so vague that hospitals deny care even when a woman’s life is at risk, forcing patients to travel out of state or suffer serious complications.

Who Suffers Most?

Low-income women who cannot afford to travel for emergency care.

Women of color, who already face higher maternal mortality rates.

Rural patients with limited access to specialized medical care.

This Is the Future Anti-Choice Politicians Created

The rise in sepsis cases isn’t an unfortunate side effect—it’s an expected outcome of policies that prioritize ideology over medical reality. When lawmakers with no medical training dictate healthcare, real people suffer. These policies are not about “saving lives”—they are about controlling women’s bodies, even at the cost of their health and safety.

What Can We Do?

Raise awareness – Share these stories and make sure people understand the real consequences of abortion bans.

Support reproductive rights organizations – Groups like the Center for Reproductive Rights and Planned Parenthood fight for safe healthcare.

Vote for pro-choice candidates – Laws can change, but only if we elect leaders who prioritize healthcare over political agendas.

Pregnant women deserve better than this. The question is: how many more have to die before lawmakers stop playing politics with their lives?