Without Roe, women cannot get medical care, any care

[edhopper]

https://www.eschatonblog.com/2022/05/deaths.html#disqus_thread

I always try to emphasize that without Roe (or equivalent), women can't possibly get any appropriate medical care. I mean *any*. I'm a pro-choice extremist generally (meaning, I'm pro-choice), but I really don't think most people understand this. It isn't just about "abortion" as popularly conceived of, it's about any OB/Gyn-related care, and absolutely any care (procedures, treatments) that might, possibly, maybe, impact a zygote. Which is basically all treatment.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/roe-dobbs-abortion-ban-reproductive-medicine-alabama.html?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=traffic&utm_source=article&utm_content=twitter_share

If you want to understand the future of medical care for pregnant women in a post-Roe world, look no further than what is happening in Alabama. As others have pointed out for Slate, the leaked draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization paves the way for criminalizing many aspects of pregnancy. While Texas’ abortion ban, S.B. 8, has essentially halted all abortions in the state, Alabama offers a glimpse of a troubling future in which the provision of medical care for pregnant people is deeply intertwined with the cultural attitudes that seek to criminalize “undesirable” pregnancy outcomes.

[Diamond_Dog]

1. Pretty soon

They will make us wear burkas and prohibit us from driving because if we get in an accident it could harm our lady parts.

I am SO SICK and TIRED of old white males legislating on womens’ bodies!!

[jimfields33]

4. They've been doing it forever including 1973

Hopefully as women continue to achieve equality, this will be lessened.

[Hekate]

12. Yeah, sure. We've had 50 years of progress, and now look at us. The GOP has the SCOTUS ...

… that it always dreamed of and while the country is pro-choice, the SCOTUS has the power to overturn damn near everything. Remember when they gutted the Voting Rights Act? Now this. Soon more.

All those years hearing nattering about the culture wars, and I didn’t really grasp that to the far-right it’s a real war. It’s a real war and they want us dead.

[hamsterjill]

8. They aren't going to make some of us!

I will fight to the death before I give in. And when and if I’m threatened, if I have the opportunity to take a few of the idiots with me, I’ll die trying to do that.

I will not go back.

[Irish_Dem]

23. American men like to see skin, so it will be mandatory halter tops and short shorts for

all females up until menopause.

Women who are no longer fertile will have to wear green garbage bags and make sure everything is covered up.

[Diamond_Dog]

24. That made me laugh, it's so true!

[DFW]

2. Though one of my daughters still lives in the USA, and in New York at that.......

She has not given up her German citizenship--just in case.

[Hekate]

13. All things considered, an intelligent choice

[DFW]

29. I don't think she ever considered giving up one or the other

Fortunately, both Germany and the USA are countries that allow you to keep your two nationalities if you are of mixed parentage, and obtained (or your parents did for you) your two birth certificates early. Both of my daughters have American birth certificates stating "Certificate of Birth of an American Citizen Abroad." I had their first birth certificates and US Passports within two hours of walking into the U.S. Embassy in Germany. Man, how THAT has changed!!

But even back then, you DID need the proper documents. I remember one German woman at the US embassy, insisting they give her son a US Passport. He was about 13 or 14. The embassy people were polite enough, but when they asked where the father was, she didn't know. When they asked for his passport or birth certificate, she didn't have them. Where was he now? She didn't know. All she knew was that he WAS American. She got pushy, but they stood firm and said they needed more definitive documentation to give some kid walking in off the street US citizenship.

[smirkymonkey]

32. Make sure she never does.

I would do anything to get out of this country.

If I had thought about it earlier and had been more motivated, I could have moved to Italy, since my Grandfather (an Italian citizen) was not naturalized until after my father was born, which would give me right of return.

I could probably still do it, but its a process and I would lose my SS and Medicare, as I will be of retirement age in 7-9 years (depending on how much I want to collect). I have some 401K money saved, but could only probably afford to live in an eastern European country on that, not a western/northern European country, which I would probably prefer. But who knows? Eastern Europe wouldn't be so bad, as I find those countries kind of charming and interesting.

[DFW]

36. She is 39. She has made her own decisions for about 20 years now.

But even though she considers New York to be “home,” she guards her German identity with equal intensity as her American one. There is much of my wife in her, which is as it should be.

If you want to move to Eastern Europe, the Czech Republic or Croatia come to mind as pleasant places, at least to visit. The language may be a bit daunting, though. Some parts of Croatia or Slovenia might appeal to you as their extreme northwest corners used to belong to Italy, and Italian is still widely spoken there. I’ve heard the Baltics are nice, but their languages are brutal, the winters are depressing, and Putin’s border is at most a 3 hour drive. I’m sure some parts of Italy are affordable, but, then, some parts of Mississippi have a reasonable cost of living, too. Somehow, I doubt that the affordable rates have you scouring the real estate listings in Meridian or Tupelo..

[Emile]

3. Not that I need anymore reasons why I hate Republicans,

but your OP is spot on!

[dlk]

5. Republicans are practicing medicine without a license

Which only reveals their entitled ignorance and utter disdain for women.

[area51]

9. +1 n/t

[Lithos]

6. Half wish we would lose the marketing around "choice"

Choice implies elective and is very transactive in nature - I chose to get a Nitro Cold Brew from Starbucks. To me, this has always been about being a way (sometimes the only way) to provide compassionate care to women. Roe v Wade has always been about a woman's full and unfettered right to care and compassion.

See this:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/abortion-activism-pro-choice-messaging-language-ireland-argentina.html

[h2ebits]

11. Excellent article. The three C's: Care, Compassion, Change

We need to lost the marketing around "choice." I like the idea of green scarves.

[AllyCat]

7. I keep wondering about the situation of fetal surgeries as well

Will the woman be required to have these surgeries if it means an otherwise “incompatible with life” complication could be averted? Will she be forced to endure bed rest the remainder of her pregnancy with no one to watch her other children? Or lose her job? What about a twin to twin transfusion ablation and one twin doesn’t survive…who gets charged with murder? The mom, the doctor, or both?

[Eyeball_Kid]

20. Do you expect bumbling lawmakers to understand complicated medical procedures?

Of course not. They're after the next election win. They aren't concerned about women, nor are they truly concerned about babies.

[Ilsa]

10. I think a lot of OB/GYNs will stop practicing

obstetrics for fear of being charged with feticide. Even when practicing GYN, I bet many will only serve women who are in menopause or have had tubal ligations.

[Irish_Dem]

25. I agree, fewer people will go into OB-GYN practice.

Too dangerous, too much liability and possible jail time.

[Ilsa]

30. Remember when there was a shortage of doctors, especially OBs, in Texas?

They were all complaining about excessive malpractice insurance premiums, so the Lege capped "pain and suffering" limits to $250,000.

I wonder how they'll try to fix this?

[Irish_Dem]

31. They don't want to fix it.

The goal is to control women, deny them healthcare.
Control all institutions and professionals.

[Irish_Dem]

26. Will psychologists want to treat females?

What if a female comes in wanting to discuss her pregnancy?

[Kaleva]

14. Won't this depend on the individual state laws?

[Hekate]

16. Not for long

[Hekate]

15. I support the full range of women's health care

Abortion is health care. So is contraception.

My gods I hate these fanatics.

[Lettuce Be]

17. Finally! I've been waiting for someone to start talking about this

Women's health care is on the chopping block. If for instance you cannot correct at ectopic pregnancy (embryo implants in the fallopian tube not the uterus) it will require emergency life-saving surgery for the mother. There is no way to simply move the developing embryo to the uterus and no way to save this pregnancy, yet, the no exception rules would basically say, let's just go ahead and wait until it's an emergency" despite knowing there will never be a viable baby. Why risk the mother in this instance?

How does a doctor simply ignore his oath to do no harm? This cannot stand but it could be a horrific fight in the meantime.

That is only one instance. There are so many. Our maternal mortality rates are too high, this will only make it worse.

I fear for the future, and I'm so glad I'm 65, not 16.

[Texaswitchy]

18. Say this on Twitter and you might get kicked off.

Some right winger complained about me for saying the same thing.

The RW's do not like being called out.

[Texaswitchy]

19. If I was of childbearing age I would think twice about having a baby now..

Really.

[Ms. Toad]

21. So my mother was a woman for less than 1/3 of her life (so far),

And I was a woman for, so far, a little over half of mine?

My high school sweetheart, a trans woman is not a woman?

The assertion that women will be unable to get any medical care limits womanhood to our childbearing capacity. While that is certainly the belief of many on the right, we need to guard against accepting it, even inadvertently, when we refer to women.

[edhopper]

22. I understand the point you are making

But you must understand you just brushed off this catastrophic development for MOST women.
And BTW, do you not think these same people are trying to ban any trans gender medical care.

[Ms. Toad]

27. And that makes it OK to adopt the right's definition of who is a woman?

Most women, even those who - at some point in their lives - have the capacity to bear children only have that capacity for roughly 35 years (half of their lives, or less). So it is not true that "women cannot get any medical care." Most women will have access, unimpaired by the demise of Roe, to medical care for over half of their lives; some will have no impairment at all, and some will have impairment for far less time.

So, as a woman no longer capable of bearing children, I read your headline and said, "What the heck?" And then I read farther and realized that you were excluding me from the definition of woman because I am past menopause.

My personal history includes my marriage being expressly denied by both my faith community because my spouse (another woman) was incapable of getting me pregnant - so being told I'm not something because of my inability to bear a child is not just a theoretical concern. It is an even more significant concern for trans women.

I'm sure that was not your intent - but that is how it came across to me, a woman who is no longer capable of bearing children.

There are a lot of ways to describe the impact on women who are, at the time medical care is sought, capable of bearing children without using the excluding language which ties womanhood to the ability to bear children. The language we use matters.

As to your point, while it is true that medical care capable of harming a fetus will likely be impacted, it is not true that all medical care will be impacted (even for the sub-group of women who are then currently child-bearing). I am a heavy consumer of medical care, as is my daughter. There are only a handful of times when it has mattered whether either of us was, or might become, pregnant (surgery, radiology, and some medications).

So yes, the demise of Roe will have impacts beyond just the ability to get an abortion, and discussing those impacts is important. But no, they do not extend to all women, to all medical care.

[edhopper]

28. Read what I linked

In anti abortion States this could end all OB-GYN care. ALL. Not just for women having children, ALL.

And wow, ONLY, surgery, radiology, anesthesia, some medication (even life saving ones) will be impacted. Sorry I made a fuss.

[Ms. Toad]

35. I'm not suggesting it isn't worth talking about -

but don't do it by defining me, my mother, or my trans women friends out of existence. Women are not defined by our reproductive organs, or our current ability to carry a child in our uterus - despite that being the position many on the right propose.

There is a pretty dramatic difference between some medical care being impacted, and being unable to get any medical care at all based on your gender. Most medical care for women will not be impacted.

Some medical care for women who are currently capable of becoming pregnant may become more complicated and costly in states in which abortion is restricted or made illegal. If surgery is needed, you can still have surgery - I know, I had surgery when I was 5 months pregnant. The medical team needs to know (hence the pregnancy tests) so they can take proper precautions. Some radiology will be restricted - there are some dyes, specifically, which cross the placental barrier. But not all, and absent a need for images of the abdominal area, the uterus can be shielded. Most medications are safe to take during pregnancy. For those which aren't - or which are known to be devastating to developing fetuses, pregnancy tests (and double layered birth control) may be required. That practice is already in place for certain medications (thalidomide, for example).

Most gynecological care is unrelated to pregnancy, so it is highly unlikely that gynecology will become unavailable. There are already doctors who avoid obstetrical care for a variety of reasons, including abortion-related reasons. But that is specific to pregnancy care - not to a general inability to obtain any medical care.

It is definitely worth discussing the potential impact beyond the ability to obrain an abortion. But being alarmist, grossly exaggerating the impact, and excluding more than half of the women (at any given point in time) from being defined as women is not helpful.

[oregonjen]

33. Will all gyn care be illegal? What about ovarian cysts? What about uterine fibroids?

Some of those conditions will warrant emergent care and the removal of those reproductive organs. Will all of it be illegal, since they are necessary for reproduction? We know they don’t care about those who have those organs, so…

[edhopper]

34. Maybe not illegal

But might not be any doctors to do them