Pennsylvania Teen Investigated for Self-Managing Abortion

3.20.25

Click to skip ahead: Criminalizing Care has an update on Brittany Watts’ lawsuit against the city of Warren, Ohio; and news on a Pennsylvania teen being investigated for ‘abuse of a corpse.’ Attacks on Democracy has the latest from Arizona, where Republicans are trying to overrule the will of voters. In the States, news from Kentucky, Maine and more. Keep An Eye On the Wisconsin Supreme Court Race. Coming Soon gives you a sneak peek of stories to come.

---

Criminalizing Care

I’m still watching what’s happening in Texas, and I’ll update you if anything new breaks about the three people arrested on abortion charges. In the meantime, I have two other criminalization stories for you.

Longtime readers will remember Brittany Watts, the Ohio woman charged with ‘abuse of a corpse’ after she miscarried at home. A grand jury thankfully declined to indict Watts—but not before her name and pregnancy loss were splashed across headlines, her reputation dragged through the mud.

That’s why I was glad to see Watts fight back. In January, she filed a suit against the city of Warren, the hospital where she was ‘treated,’ the police officer who interrogated her in a hospital bed, the doctor who denied her care, and the nurses who reported her—despite the fact that she had done nothing illegal.

You can read Watts’ full and damning allegations here. The tl;dr version is that two nurses and a police officer conspired to “fabricate evidence to falsely implicate” Watts in criminal conduct:

“They knowingly created reports and hospital notes that contained blatantly false information. As a result, Ms. Watts was arrested and charged with a felony: abuse of a corpse. She faced a year in prison for simply having a miscarriage at home.”

This week, the city of Warren responded to the suit. They’re arguing that the city has no legal responsibility for any harm caused to Watts, and that they acted in good faith after a nurse called police. The filing also called the interrogation of Watts—which was conducted while she was in a hospital bed connected to IVs—a “consensual interview.”

I’ll keep you updated as I find out more—or if the hospital, nurses or police officer respond to Watts’ suit. For all the details, read Abortion, Every Day’s coverage below:

BREAKING: Police & Nurses Conspired to Fabricate Evidence Against Brittany Watts, Suit Says

In other criminalization news, this story out of Pennsylvania is just gutting. A teenager there is being investigated for ‘abuse of a corpse’ after self-managing an abortion and burying the fetus in her backyard.

If you’re a regular reader, you know these cases tend to follow a very specific pattern—and this one is no exception.

• People are often arrested or investigated under charges that seem to have little to do with abortion—like practicing medicine without a license for using abortion pills, or abuse of a corpse because of how fetal remains were handled.

• We also tend to see sensationalized local media coverage that treats someone’s pregnancy loss as a crime story, with articles that often solely rely on prosecutors’ claims and police records. (This is exactly what happened to Brittany Watts.) In the case of this Pennsylvania teen, headlines claim a “baby” was buried in a backyard, or refer to it as a “gravesite.” One article even cited the executive director of an anti-abortion crisis pregnancy center as an ‘expert.’ You can guess how that went.

• Often, those criminalized are turned in by someone they trusted—health care providers, friends, family. Here, it was a ‘friend’ who went to police with text messages the teen had sent about her pregnancy and abortion.

• And while we don’t know much about this teen’s background, we do know those most often targeted in these cases are low-income, women of color, immigrants, or people struggling with housing or substance use. Prosecutors go after these women and girls because they think that no one will care, and that they’ll come across as unsympathetic.

All of which is to say: These cases follow a pattern, for better and worse. It’s a nightmare to see this happen again and again—but it’s helpful to know what to look for.

The good-ish news is that so far, police have not brought charges against the Pennsylvania teen. But the fact that she’s been questioned by police—her pregnancy loss and private messages with a friend blasted all over local media—is disgusting. Even when charges aren’t brought, or end up being dropped, there is still an incredible amount of damage done. I think often of the Georgia woman whose miscarriage was investigated by police after she lost her pregnancy in a public bathroom. Imagine going through this kind of trauma, and then having to defend yourself to cops.

This latest story is also a brutal reminder of two things:

This can happen anywhere—even a state with abortion protections in place. Yes, fetal personhood laws make things exponentially worse, but we’ve seen these kinds of investigations in pro-choice states and even before Roe was overturned. (Just a few months ago, a woman in my home state of New York was investigated for her miscarriage.)

‘Viability’ language and laws are dangerous. Reports suggest this teen was told she was too far along for an abortion, so she sought out abortion medication. In Pennsylvania, abortion is legal until 24 weeks; presumably, police investigated because they believed the pregnancy was past ‘viability’. Leaving aside for a moment that ‘viability’ isn’t a real medical standard, a coroner’s report says that this teen’s fetus was just past 20 weeks—a month too early to be considered legally viable.

So if she’d been a few weeks further along, would she have been arrested? If it was a few weeks earlier, would police have backed off? Why is this a question at all?

For more on how anti-abortion politicians and activists are weaponizing fear and encouraging people to turn on one another—read on below.

Abortion & Snitch Culture

---

To learn more about criminalization, check out If/When/How and Pregnancy Justice.

If you’re self-managing an abortion and need medical advice, contact the Miscarriage & Abortion Hotline: 833-246-2632

For free legal help as a patient or health practitioner, call this free Repro Legal Helpline: 844-868-2812

---

Attacks on Democracy

So much for “the will of the people!” Arizona Republicans are doing their best to pretend that voters didn’t just codify abortion rights into the state constitution—this week, they advanced a backdoor abortion ban designed to undermine the November ballot measure win.

Here’s the short version: they’re trying to pass House Bill 2547, which would threaten doctors’ Medicaid funding if they even mention abortion. On Wednesday, the Republican-majority Senate Government Committee approved the bill.

For a detailed breakdown, don’t miss the Arizona Mirror’s coverage—truly a must-read if you want to understand how blatantly Republicans are shitting on the will of voters:

“But the sweeping change to state law would forbid the state and any of its political subdivisions, including state agencies and cities, from entering into contracts with or awarding grants to any person or facility that provides or “promotes” abortions. That would eliminate Medicaid funding to any hospital, health care facility or doctor who sees AHCCCS patients — virtually every health care provider in Arizona — if they so much as tell a pregnant patient about abortions.”

The legislation is so broad, it could even impact doctors in hospital emergency rooms—who would be banned from ‘promoting’ abortion by even mentioning one to a patient.

You’re going to love how Republicans responded when Democrats pointed out that the bill is in direct opposition to Arizona’s newly-enacted amendment, Prop. 139. Chairman Jake Hoffman said, “There’s no reason to talk about 139 because this doesn’t deal with 139. This deals with public funding.” COME ON.

And there’s more: Republicans are also pushing House Bill 2681, another bill that defies the new pro-choice amendment supported by over 61% of Arizona voters. This one would force patients to make in-person visits to access abortion medication, submit to unnecessary blood tests, and endure state-mandated lies about the “psychological aftereffects” of abortion pills.

But here’s the kicker: Doctors would also have to tell patients that they “may see the remains of the unborn child in the process of completing the abortion.”

Ghouls. Absolute ghouls.

The good news is that if these bills make it through the legislature, pro-choice Gov. Katie Hobbs will veto them. But the fact that Republicans are wasting no time trying to undo a democratic vote tells you everything you need to know.

They don’t care about the will of the people. They don’t care about the law. And they sure as hell don’t care about pregnant people.

For more on how anti-abortion politicians are undermining democracy across the country, check out Bloomberg Law’s overview of Republican attacks in states that passed pro-choice ballot measures.

In the States

In Kentucky, 85 health care providers have signed onto a letter from Planned Parenthood, asking Gov. Andy Beshear to veto HB 90—the legislation I covered last week that would pave the way to ban life-saving abortions. I’ve written about this story a lot this week, so I won’t repeat myself; just know that what’s happening in Kentucky connects to broader national attacks on abortion rights, and you should catch yourself up if this is the first you’re hearing about it.

In better news, Maine is advancing legislation to allow doctors to keep their names off prescription labels for abortion medication. New York passed a similar law last month, in response to Louisiana prosecutors indicting a New York abortion provider.

Dr. Maggie Carpenter was targeted with criminal charges in Louisiana and civil charges in Texas after prosecutors saw her name on prescription labels. “After today, that will no longer happen,” Gov. Kathy Hochul said at a press conference when she signed the bill.

In Maine, bill sponsor Rep. Sally Cluchey said that LD 538 would offer the same protections, “ensuring that health care providers can continue to serve patients without fear of harassment or harm.”

“Without this additional protection, medical professionals in Maine, who are already being targeted by states seeking to criminalize care, remain vulnerable to legal intimidation.”

And that’s the thing. This isn’t just about protecting providers from criminal or civil charges. Since Roe was overturned, there’s been a troubling uptick in violence and harassment against abortion providers—and the new Trump administration has basically given extremists carte blanche to attack whoever they want. Keeping providers’ names off prescription labels is the least we can do to protect the people putting their lives and freedom on the line every day to ensure patients get the care they need.

I’ll be keeping a close eye on this one, and whatever bill might come up in Illinois, where legislators are considering something similar.

Where we really need this bill, abortion providers tell me, is California. Where you at, Gov. Newsom?

Quick hits:

• Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis got some Catholic kudos for his role in defeating Amendment 4.

• Three clinics in Houston, Texas, have been shut down in connection with the case against a midwife and her two associates;

• And Prism has a piece on new threats to abortion rights in Puerto Rico. (I know, not a state—but it’s an important piece I didn’t want you to miss.)

Keep An Eye On

All eyes are on Wisconsin, where—once again—the state Supreme Court election has become all about abortion rights.

If you need a refresher on the race, click here. For background on the case that will determine the future of abortion rights in Wisconsin, click here. But here’s the short version: Republican Brad Schimel is running against pro-choice judge Susan Crawford. Just a few weeks ago, Schimel claimed that the women justices on the Wisconsin Supreme Court were too “emotional” to rule on abortion. Seriously. He even said something about the “tone of their voice.”

Given all that, it should come as no surprise that one of Schimel’s top funders is none other than King Incel himself, Elon Musk—who has given over $12 million to the Republican’s campaign.

By the way, Schimel’s comments about the female justices came after he admitted on video that he had already made up his mind on the abortion rights case in front of the Court. He declared there’s “not a constitutional right to abortion in our State Constitution” and said it would be a “sham” if the justices ruled in favor of abortion rights.

That’s why anti-abortion powerhouse Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America is deploying student canvassers to get out the vote for Schimel. A memo from Reproductive Freedom for All also points out that Pro-Life Wisconsin told its supporters that the “easiest road” to enacting a total abortion ban in Wisconsin “will be to elect Brad Schimel to the state supreme court.”

Remember, this race is set to be the most expensive state court election in U.S. history. That’s because the outcome won’t just decide the future of abortion rights in Wisconsin—it could also shape national politics. (As a key swing state, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court has the power to influence election laws and, by extension, the presidency.)

I’ll be keeping a close eye on this one, and you should too.

Coming Soon

Watch your inbox for news about the anti-abortion attacks on Dr. Oz (a sentence that makes my eye twitch); an annual repro rights report card for the states; and more on the Texas law seeking to ‘clarify’ the state’s ban.