Alabama Woman With Molar Pregnancy Denied Care

10.29.24

Click to skip ahead: In Language Matters, Republicans’ new attack on ‘ban.’ In Stats & Studies, more proof of Americans’ support for abortion throughout pregnancy. Ballot Measure Updates in New York, Florida and Arkansas. In the Nation, some quick hits. Care Denied looks at one Alabama woman’s story. And Anti-Abortion Strategy reminds us about the attacks on buffer zones.

---

Language Matters

How many times have we talked about the word ‘ban’? Too many to count, I think. You all know that Republicans are trying to hide their extremism from voters by saying they don’t support abortion ‘bans’—but ‘reasonable compromises,’ ‘consensus legislation,’ or ‘minimum national standards.’ All of those terms, of course, just mean abortion ban.

It’s a strategy adopted by the whole of the party: From JD Vance pretending to oppose a national abortion ban by using ‘minimum national standard’ to the Virginia GOP putting out ads ahead of last year’s election claiming that the state’s 15-week abortion ban “is not a ban.”

Incredibly, Republicans have found a way to get even more shameless with their ‘ban’ nonsense: NOTUS reports this week that Republican House candidates who supported the “Life at Conception Act” are insisting that the legislation—which would enshrine fetal personhood—is not a ban. That’s right, they’re arguing that a law that would outlaw all abortion isn’t actually a ban. And just wait until you hear why.

When Rep. Don Bacon, who is running for re-election in Nebraska, was called out by his Democratic opponent for supporting this abortion ban in a debate a few weeks ago, Bacon spoke up to “correct the record.” He said, “The bill he’s referring to doesn’t even mention the word abortion in it.” Instead, Bacon said, “It’s a statement of principle that the unborn child has rights.”

So because the bill doesn’t use the word abortion, it couldn’t possibly be an abortion ban—again, even though it grants personhood from “the moment of fertilization!”

This wasn’t just a random comment from one House candidate. NOTUS also points out that GOP Rep. Yvette Herrell in New Mexico has been running ads saying that she opposes a national abortion ban, even though she also supported the “Life at Conception Act.” When a reporter asked about the obvious conflict, Herrell’s campaign said that the “Life at Conception Act” is simple a “messaging bill that acknowledges that babies have the constitutional right to life before they are born.”

A messaging bill. A statement of principle. But not a ban.

I really want you to take in how scary this is: Republicans are claiming that enshrining fetal personhood is not an abortion ban. Even though it would…ban abortion. In that case, I would love to know what the fuck a ban actually is. Because according to conservative politicians, it doesn’t seem to exist at all.

The truth is that conservatives have been laying the groundwork for this strategy for a while: This summer, Republicans made a big deal about supposedly removing a call for a national ban from the GOP platform–even though their abortion plank included constitutional protections for fetuses.

This also gets at something I wrote just yesterday: I predicted that Republicans would start to promise that their agenda no longer includes targeting abortion, even as they continue to target abortion. That’s exactly what they’re doing here. They’re going to try to divorce ‘abortion’ from ‘protections’ for fetuses because they know it’s politically toxic. We’d do well to prepare.

Stats & Studies

Speaking of abortion being politically toxic for Republicans, let’s take a look at why it’s such a losing issue for them.

You all know I love a good abortion poll, and this one from PerryUndem and the National Institute of Reproductive Health (NIRH) is no exception. The survey, conducted last month, reaffirms what Abortion, Every Day has been reporting from the get-go: America supports abortion.

And not in some wishy-washy, restrictions-heavy way, either. Americans support abortion because they don’t want the government involved in pregnancy or medical decisions. After Roe’s demise, that support has only grown.

Sixty-three percent of respondents told PerryUndem/NIRH that recent abortion bans and restrictions have made them think about “wanting the government to stay out of abortion decisions all together.” Over half said that recent abortion prohibitions made them think about “not wanting bans or restrictions on abortion at all.” And when asked whether abortion should be regulated by the government or left to the patient and their doctor, 75% said the latter.

That aligns with other polling that shows over 80% of Americans don’t want abortion regulated by the government at all. If that sounds like a high number to you, it’s probably because you’re used to seeing polls that rely on an outdated framework: Too often, pollsters will ask voters when abortion should be restricted rather than if it should be restricted. When asked the right question—the one that doesn’t default to conservative framing—Americans answer resoundingly that they don’t want government interference in pregnancy.

That’s even the case when voters are asked about abortion in the last three months of pregnancy:

Because in spite of Republican messaging asserting that Americans want some kind of abortion restriction, voters actually support abortion rights throughout pregnancy.

In fact, nearly 6 in 10 respondents told PerryUndem/NIRH that they’re more concerned about “laws that ban women and their doctors from deciding if an abortion is necessary” than “laws that allow women to get an abortion at any point in pregnancy.”

Which makes sense! It’s not as if Americans are hearing horror stories about women access later abortion care; they’re hearing story after story of what happens when people are denied care.

This is why I get so irritated by reporters’ insistence on continually asking politicians at what point abortion should be regulated. Sure, ask once—but there should be twenty questions about bans for every one about ‘later’ abortion. Because only one of those things are killing women.

Opposition to government interference in pregnancy is so strong, in fact, that voters were more likely to support a pro-choice ballot measure that didn’t allow the state to restrict abortion after viability by seven points. (In an earlier poll, PerryUndem found that voters preferred the ballot measure without restrictions by 15 points!)

That impact on potential votes was also high when asked about candidates: nearly 60% of Democrats said they’d be less likely to support an elected official who was pushing for restrictions on abortion later in pregnancy.

To me, this is just more proof that Democrats should be even more proactive on abortion rights than they have been—and that if they’re going to talk about abortion, they should be doing so without relying on ‘restoring Roe’ or restrictions. American voters are already there; we shouldn’t have to wait for politicians to catch up.

For more on abortion polling, read below:

New Poll: Americans Support Abortion Throughout Pregnancy

Ballot Measure Updates

Republicans know that Americans overwhelmingly support abortion rights, that’s why they’ve spent so much time attacking democracy rather than trying to change hearts and minds. They know they’ve lost voters on abortion for good.

One of the best examples of that is what happened in Arkansas, where anti-abortion lawmakers and activists successfully quashed a pro-choice measure rather than let voters have a say.

The Guardian has a must-read piece about how the “right-wing machine” killed the state’s abortion ballot measure—from a major conservative donor and Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ inside circle to so-called objective judges.

You may remember that Arkansas’ measure got stripped from the ballot after state Republicans claimed that abortion rights activists didn’t file the correct paperwork for signatures gathered by paid petitioners. The Guardian gets into the nitty gritty, but the short version is that the Secretary of State refused to count the signatures, and was backed up by Arkansas’ Republican leaders and judiciary.

My heart really breaks for all the people there who worked so hard to collect those signatures and tried to ensure that voters would have a say.

Speaking of shitty tactics: I told you yesterday that anti-abortion groups in New York were putting up signs telling people to “protect girls’ sports” by opposing Prop. 1, the state’s pro-choice measure. Unfortunately, those efforts seem to be gaining steam in these last days before the election.

The New York Times reports that a handful of conservative donors have given $8 million in last-minute funding to beat back the equal rights amendment, including over $6 million from Donald Trump funder Dick Uihlein. (Uihlein also gave millions to the campaign against Ohio’s Issue 1; hopefully his money is wasted here as well.)

The Times also points out that the ad campaign against Prop 1 has gotten even more ridiculous, claiming that the pro-choice amendment “isn’t about equal rights…it’s about special rights for illegal immigrants.”

In some slightly better news, the Florida judge who blocked Republicans from continuing to attack Amendment 4 has extended that temporary restraining order through election day. The block was issued after Gov. Ron DeSantis’ office threatened television stations with criminal charges if they continued to run ads for the pro-choice measure. In his initial ruling less than two weeks ago, Judge Mark E. Walker wrote, “It’s the First Amendment, stupid.”

But check out Florida’s argument, because it’s one that other Republican-led states might use in the future: At a hearing today about the order, an attorney for the state argued that the state was within its rights to threaten journalists because the Amendment 4 ad spread “false information about the availability of lifesaving medical services.” In fact, lawyer Brian Barnes said that the ad from Floridians Protecting Freedom—which you can watch here—was akin to falsely claiming that the state’s 911 system had shut down. (?!!)

This is part of a broader Republican tactic of blaming pro-choicers for the post-Roe harm done to women. They want voters to believe that women are dying and going septic because activists scared doctors off from giving care—not because of their laws. That’s why DeSantis held a press tour with anti-abortion doctors to accuse pro-choice activists of spreading dangerous “misinformation” about the ban (and why we saw similar moves in Nebraska and South Dakota).

And remember, the threats against television stations are just one part of Republicans’ attack on Amendment 4: DeSantis has also launched a bogus voter fraud investigation, complete with police showing up to voters’ homes, and is using millions in taxpayer dollars to fund a state-led disinformation campaign against the measure. This week, we also learned that two political committees with ties to DeSantis have raised over $8 million to continue their opposition campaign to Amendment 4.

The question is whether these attacks on democracy will hurt the measure with voters. Numbers from Florida Atlantic University this week found that Amendment 4 has the support of 58% of voters, just short of the 60% needed. And a survey from St. Pete Polls reports that 54% of voters support the measure. But earlier polls showed Amendment 4 with a strong lead.

In the Nation

• Attacks on democracy are so bad that it’s now news when a GOP leader says they’ll respect the outcome of an election;

• The Los Angeles Times warns how a Trump presidency would attack abortion rights;

• Stevie Nicks says not having an abortion would have destroyed Fleetwood Mac;

• A lawyer and researcher writes in MSNBC that she doesn’t regret her abortion, but regrets not talking about it;

• Scripps covers the mifepristone lawsuit that AED broke news on;

• Finally, if you haven’t watched Zurawski v Texas yet, it’s time to remedy that!

Care Denied

The Meteor has a powerful but devastating story this week about an Alabama woman who was denied an abortion despite having a life-threatening pregnancy. Tamara Costa, 24, found out at the beginning of her second trimester that her fetus had a fatal chromosomal abnormality and no skull.

The only advice or help her OBGYN could offer? A sticky note with a phone number and the words “Planned Parenthood Chicago” written on it. It wasn’t until Costa was actually in Chicago that she found out that she had a dangerous molar pregnancy that was putting her life at risk. She had to be transferred a hospital immediately for care.

Costa’s husband Caleb says, it was “like she didn’t matter…Her life was at risk and it didn’t matter to anybody.” Just a nightmare. Watch Costa’s full story below:

Anti-Abortion Strategy

For over a year, I’ve been raising the alarm on buffer zones, and how anti-abortion organizations are trying to do away with these last bits of protection for reproductive care clinics. (Buffer zones are rules that keep anti-abortion protestors a certain number of feet away from clinic property in order to protect patients and staff from harassment and violence.)

Month after month, conservatives have been suing over state and local buffer zone polices, arguing that they’re free speech violations. Apparently, they think screaming in patients’ faces and harassing doctors is a First Amendment right.

USA Today reports this week about the effort to get a case in front of the Supreme Court to overturn Hill v. Colorado, which ruled that limiting harassment in front of a clinic isn’t a free speech violation.

One anti-abortion activist, for example, filed a suit against a New Jersey buffer zone that the American Center for Law and Justice hopes to get in front of the Court. Another organization, Coalition Life in Missouri, is suing over the buffer zone in Carbondale, Illinois. They claim they need to get close enough to “make eye contact” in order to effectively do their work. Yikes.

That particular case is important because Carbondale is a border town that’s seen increased anti-abortion harassment since Roe was overturned. (Coalition Life is also being represented by the powerful conservative legal organization, the Thomas More Society.)

All of which is to say: I’ll be paying close attention to this one.

And remember, this is happening at the same time that anti-abortion groups and conservative media are trying to paint extremists convicted of violating the FACE Act as innocent, praying grandmas. It’s all part of a bigger plan to make it impossible—or miserable—for women to get care.

“If your wife is shivering and bleeding on the operating room table during a routine delivery gone bad, her pressure dropping as she loses more and more blood or some unforeseen infection spreads and her doctors aren’t sure if they can act, you will be the one praying that it’s not too late.

You will be the one pleading for somebody, anybody, to do something. Then there is the tragic but very real possibility that in the worst-case scenario, you just might be the one holding flowers at the funeral. You might be the one left to raise your children alone.”

- Michelle Obama, October 2024