Roe v Wade is on deck

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Women better get used to the idea of not owning their vaginas.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Texas Supreme Court doesn't seem to be in a rush to manage this case.

 

[lpetrich]

Texas woman who sued for abortion now leaving state for care - ABC News - "Kate Cox asked for an abortion to preserve her fertility."

"This past week of legal limbo has been hellish for Kate," Nancy Northup, president and CEO for the CRR, said in a statement Monday. "Her health is on the line. She's been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn't wait any longer...Kate's case has shown the world that abortion bans are dangerous for pregnant people, and exceptions don't work. She desperately wanted to be able to get care where she lives and recover at home surrounded by family. While Kate had the ability to leave the state, most people do not, and a situation like this could be a death sentence."

CRR = Center for Reproductive Rights

Cox has received offers to help her access abortion in other states, such as Colorado, and other countries, including Canada, according to the CRR. It has not been disclosed where she is receiving abortion care.

In Cox's original lawsuit, she said her baby received a diagnosis of full trisomy 18, which is a condition with a very high likelihood of miscarriage or stillbirth and low survival rates.

Abortion tourism, a throwback to the pre-RvW era.

 

[TomC]

Abortion tourism, a throwback to the pre-RvW era.

I've never been a fan of elective abortion or RvW.

But this is why I so vehemently opposed overturning the decision. Returning it to the bad old days of a patchwork of state laws. And it's all even worse now than then, because dufous state officials are in a "Crueler than Thou" competition for the dumbass vote.
Tom

 

[ideologyhunter]

In the dark hours of the night, Donald Trump wrestles with the moral dimensions of what he has wrought.
Wait, that wasn't a sigh, it was a Quarter Pounder fart.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Texas Supreme Court proves they like to play doctor and reverse lower court ruling that would have allowed woman not to possibly die.

Check out these assholes!

A woman who meets the medical-necessity exception need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion. Under the law, it is a doctor who must decide that a woman is suffering from a life-threatening condition during a pregnancy, raising the necessity for an abortion to save her life or to prevent impairment of a major bodily function. The law leaves to physicians—not judges—both the discretion and the responsibility to exercise their reasonable medical judgment, given the unique facts and circumstances of each patient.

Yes, these awful psychopaths actually say this in their ruling.

What did I say about hyper-technicalities above?

Though the statute affords physicians discretion, it requires more than a doctor’s mere subjective belief. By requiring the doctor to exercise “reasonable medical judgment,” the Legislature determined that the medical judgment involved must meet an objective standard.4Dr. Karsan asserted that she has a “good faith belief” that Ms. Cox meets the exception’s requirements. Certainly, a doctor cannot exercise “reasonable medical judgment” if she does not hold her judgment in good faith. But the statute requires that judgment be a “reasonable medical” judgment, and Dr. Karsan has not asserted that her “good faith belief” about Ms. Cox’s condition meets that standard.

Let's continue with the evil double-speak.

The exception does not hold a doctor to medical certainty, nor does it cover only adverse results that will happen immediately absent an abortion, nor does it ask the doctor to wait until the mother is within an inch of death or her bodily impairment is fully manifest or practically irreversible. The exception does not mandate that a doctor in a true emergency await consultation with other doctors who may not be available. Rather, the exception is predicated on a doctor’s acting within the zone of reasonable medical judgment, which is what doctors do every day. An exercise of reasonable medical judgment does not mean that every doctor would reach the same conclusion.

An exercise this doctor did and they said it wasn't "objective" enough. There ruling says two conflicting things, and provides doctors with a scenario where abortion is never an option. And then have the gall to actually put up their shoulders and say "but it isn't up to us."

Who the fuck do these people think they are? Well, I think at least in theory, they are the 10 people that just put Texas up on the electoral map for 2024.

 

[ZiprHead]

Kate Cox case reveals toll of US abortion bans on women in medical emergencies

Lawsuits from women denied the procedure despite health risks shows how bans don’t allow for complexities of pregnancy

www.theguardian.com

When Kate Cox got the news that her baby would probably only live for a few days, she went online to figure out her options. A 31-year-old mother of two living in Texas, Cox could not get an abortion, but she also knew that she did not want to make her baby suffer.

That’s when Cox came across the news that 20 Texas women had come forward to tell a court that they, like her, had been unable to get abortions in medical emergencies. Within days, Cox went public too: she became the first woman since the fall of Roe v Wade to sue for an abortion while actively pregnant.

Dozens of women across the United States have now launched lawsuits alleging that they were denied abortions even in the midst of pregnancy complications that put them at often severe risk. Their voices have redefined the conversation around abortion rights in the US since the fall of Roe v Wade, casting a spotlight on the unique circumstances that can lead to unexpected abortions, the complicated reality of pregnancy and the medical and ethical difficulty of legislating both.

Ultimately, Cox fled Texas for an abortion, her lawyers said earlier this week. Hours after their announcement, the Texas state supreme court overturned a lower court order that would have let her terminate her pregnancy in her home state.

In the wake of Cox’s lawsuit, dozens of people have reached out to Cox’s lawyers to say that they want to find some way to help – or that what happened to Cox happened to them, too.

 

[ZiprHead]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

I'm not going to get too upset with the companies. When you deal with sensitive stuff (and pharmacies have a lot of controlled substances) defying the cops can cause you a lot of grief while they "investigate" the "mishandling" of said stuff.

 

[Rhea]

That’s a good point

 

[ZiprHead]

That’s a good point

No, it's a terrible point.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

I'm not going to get too upset with the companies. When you deal with sensitive stuff (and pharmacies have a lot of controlled substances) defying the cops can cause you a lot of grief while they "investigate" the "mishandling" of said stuff.

Then get a fucking warrant! That makes it so much easier for the pharmacy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

I'm not going to get too upset with the companies. When you deal with sensitive stuff (and pharmacies have a lot of controlled substances) defying the cops can cause you a lot of grief while they "investigate" the "mishandling" of said stuff.

Then get a fucking warrant! That makes it so much easier for the pharmacy.

Congress would have to do that. As it stands the companies will be hurting themselves if they fight it.

 

[ZiprHead]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

I'm not going to get too upset with the companies. When you deal with sensitive stuff (and pharmacies have a lot of controlled substances) defying the cops can cause you a lot of grief while they "investigate" the "mishandling" of said stuff.

Then get a fucking warrant! That makes it so much easier for the pharmacy.

Congress would have to do that. As it stands the companies will be hurting themselves if they fight it.

Where do you come up with this crap???

 

[Swammerdami]

While I've always been a strong supporter of Women's Choice, I've always thought it absurd to claim that abortion rights are "guaranteed by the Constitution."

I agree with those who say Congress should have enacted a National Right to Abortion Law when they had the chance. Did they ever have the chance? Why didn't they do it then?

 

[Swammerdami]

CVS, Rite Aid, Walgreens hand out medical records to cops without warrants

Lawmakers want HHS to revise health privacy law to require warrants.

arstechnica.com

ome will do so without even running the requests by a legal professional, according to a congressional investigation.

The revelation raises grave medical privacy concerns, particularly in a post-Dobbs era in which many states are working to criminalize reproductive health care. Even if people in states with restrictive laws cross state lines for care, pharmacists in massive chains, such as CVS, can access records across borders.

Lawmakers noted the pharmacies' policies for releasing medical records in a letter dated Tuesday to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Xavier Becerra. The letter—signed by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.)—said their investigation pulled information from briefings with eight big prescription drug suppliers.

They include the seven largest pharmacy chains in the country: CVS Health, Walgreens Boots Alliance, Cigna, Optum Rx, Walmart Stores, Inc., The Kroger Company, and Rite Aid Corporation. The lawmakers also spoke with Amazon Pharmacy.

HIPAA violations all the way down.

I'm not going to get too upset with the companies. When you deal with sensitive stuff (and pharmacies have a lot of controlled substances) defying the cops can cause you a lot of grief while they "investigate" the "mishandling" of said stuff.

Then get a fucking warrant! That makes it so much easier for the pharmacy.

Congress would have to do that. As it stands the companies will be hurting themselves if they fight it.

Where do you come up with this crap???

It appears Mr. Pechtel is implicitly acknowledging that U.S.A. has become a fascist country.

 

[Politesse]

While I've always been a strong supporter of Women's Choice, I've always thought it absurd to claim that abortion rights are "guaranteed by the Constitution."

Do you feel that men and women are equally and fairly punished for the consequences of illicit sex?

 

[Swammerdami]

While I've always been a strong supporter of Women's Choice, I've always thought it absurd to claim that abortion rights are "guaranteed by the Constitution."

Do you feel that men and women are equally and fairly punished for the consequences of illicit sex?

Sprichts Englisch? Whatever.

ETA: I'm sure you think you've connected some dots, A to B to C to D relating my comment to your question.
And I'm sure your connection has flaws.
Post the A to B etc. if you want help debugging your confusion.

 

[Politesse]

While I've always been a strong supporter of Women's Choice, I've always thought it absurd to claim that abortion rights are "guaranteed by the Constitution."

Do you feel that men and women are equally and fairly punished for the consequences of illicit sex?

Sprichts Englisch? Whatever.

Ah, so you never understood the legal argument to begin with.

 

[Swammerdami]

While I've always been a strong supporter of Women's Choice, I've always thought it absurd to claim that abortion rights are "guaranteed by the Constitution."

Do you feel that men and women are equally and fairly punished for the consequences of illicit sex?

Sprichts Englisch? Whatever.

Ah, so you never understood the legal argument to begin with.

Ah. So you think the Constitution require that if I get a woman pregnant, I must wear devices to simulate the burdens of pregnancy and childbirth?

Like I say: Whatever.