A recent op-ed in The New York Times claimed that women are paying a “deeply personal price” for state laws that protect innocent preborn children from being killed in the womb. Yet, as many have stated, it isn’t pro-life laws that are causing medical crises — it’s misleading media outlets and negligent doctors and media outlets, who seem all too eager to peddle misinformation.
The Times tells the story of Megan Palmese, a pregnant mother of two living in Florida. She had always wanted a large family, said the Times, but had trouble conceiving naturally and used IVF previously. This time, she became pregnant naturally, but it wasn’t all good news for Palmese. She had been diagnosed with breast cancer and was undergoing treatments when she learned she was pregnant. On top of that, the baby had implanted in her C-section scar, meaning the pregnancy was ectopic.
Known as a “cesarean-scar pregnancy,” there are serious risks involved with this type of ectopic pregnancy, including uterine rupture and hemorrhage. Treatment for ectopic pregnancy is not considered an induced abortion under any pro-life law, including Florida’s. That’s because the purpose of such treatment is to save the mother, not to intentionally kill the child. In such a case, if intervention is not quickly initiated to save the mother, then both mother and child are likely to die.
Yet, Palmese claims that doctors in Florida turned their backs on her in a dire health emergency.
Times author Mara Gay claimed, “But Florida has a six-week abortion ban and Palmese was six weeks and five days pregnant. Palmese told me in a phone interview her doctor buried his head into his hands. He told her he had reached out to physicians across Florida but none believed they could help, despite the exception in the Florida law for saving the life of the mother. ‘Everybody said the same thing,’ she recalled. ‘Unless there’s no heartbeat, there’s nothing they can do for me.'”
View this post on Instagram
“There is no disagreement”
Dr. Richard H. Sandler, MD, a professor of pediatrics associated with Nemours Children’s Hospital, and co-chair of Florida Physicians Against Amendment 4, explained to Live Action News that the baby in an ectopic pregnancy is likely not going to survive, and the “accepted medical therapy” is surgery or medication to avoid the potentially deadly outcomes for the mother.
“There is NO disagreement about this, in fact,” he emphatically stated. “EVERY state law, including those restricting abortion, make this provision to save the life of the mother. Specifically in Florida, the law in question is Florida’s Heartbeat Protection Act or SB 300, which EXPLICITLY provides for medical treatment as indicated to save the mother’s life, which would include, but is not limited to, all ectopic pregnancies.”
Florida’s Heartbeat Act states (emphases added):
A physician may not knowingly perform or induce a termination of pregnancy if the physician determines the gestational age of the fetus is more than 6 weeks unless one of the following conditions is met:
(a) Two physicians certify in writing that, in reasonable medical judgment, the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to save the pregnant woman’s life or avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman other than a psychological condition.
(b) The physician certifies in writing that, in reasonable medical judgment, there is a medical necessity for legitimate emergency medical procedures for termination of the pregnancy to save the pregnant woman’s life or avert a serious risk of imminent substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman other than a psychological condition, and another physician is not available for consultation.
“Therefore, the doctors cited in the article are — if this is what they said and the facts are as reported — making a manifestly false assertion,” said Dr. Sandler. “With the caveats just mentioned, either the doctor was ignorant of the law, or was lying. There are no other choices. This type of misinformation and fabrication is hurting women and misleading more than a few doctors, and should be soundly condemned.”
Negligence happens… even in states that are pro-abortion
The misinformation is spreading far and wide thanks to articles like those run by The New York Times, a highly trusted source for news. Yet, the author of this op-ed is either misinformed or lying.
She wrote, “As Americans vote in the coming days, I hope they’ll remember the ordinariness with which women in this country have been stripped of their rights, including the right to life, in just two years. I hope they’ll remember that medical complications with pregnancies occur regularly in the states that have banned abortion, forcing women like Palmese into life-threatening situations.”
Yet, such situations are playing out in pro-abortion states as well. The Associated Press (AP) reported in August that, “Serious violations that jeopardized a mother or her fetus’ health occurred in states with and without abortion bans…” The AP was clear that pregnant women are sometimes denied appropriate medical care, not because of pro-life laws, but because of doctor or hospital negligence or misdiagnosis.
Despite this, major media outlets with a pro-abortion political agenda continue to zero in on instances of negligence in pro-life states so that pro-life laws can be erroneously blamed. Let’s be clear: the pro-abortion media is both lying and allowing others to perpetuate these lies unchecked.
Questions about Palmese’s story
In addition to all of this, questions linger about Palmese’s story.
It is implied that Palmese’s life was in immediate danger, yet she drove to Northwell’s North Shore University Hospital in Long Island — about 1,000 miles away — even though she could have driven to North Carolina or Washington, D.C. in far less time.
Further, the doctor in New York, Dr. Michael Leslie Nimaroff, told Gay that based on Palmese’s records, Florida had denied her critical care. It wasn’t specifically Florida that denied her care. It was Florida doctors, many of whom do not appear to understand their state’s own law or even know what it states (see text of the law above), who denied her treatment.
Furthermore, one of the reasons doctors may have hesitated is that there is the possibility of carrying to term with a c-section scar ectopic pregnancy — however, women who decide not to receive treatment are at high risk of placenta accreta, a potentially dangerous condition in which the placenta grows into the uterine wall. If that were to occur, the mother would need to deliver the baby early by C-section. Mother and child would need to be followed closely by a maternal-fetal medical doctor who specializes in high-risk pregnancies.
For those women, UT Southwestern Medical Center said it “is rare” for them to “keep their uterus” after delivery. In most cases, a hysterectomy will need to be performed at the same time as the C-section.
The near-certainty of losing one’s fertility would most likely mean such a scenario would fall under the law’s abortion exception — to “avert a serious risk of imminent substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”
Who pays the ultimate price?
Gay also made two specifically bold claims in the op-ed. The first was that women are paying a “deeply personal price” and the second was that women are being denied their “right to life.” But when abortion is legal, it is innocent preborn humans who pay the ultimate “personal price,” like these babies seen below. It is these children who are, through the passage of unjust laws, quite literally being denied their right to life and their human dignity.
Palmese and other women who have been denied proper medical care have negligent doctors to blame, not pro-life laws that are denying their right to life.
Baby Harriet found in medical waste bin outside DC abortion facility. Photo courtesy of Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising.
Baby Angel was found in a medical waste bin. Experts believe he was possibly exsanguinated and dismembered alive.
The Times is exploiting an apparent case of medical neglect (if the story is accurate) to promote the direct and intentional killing of preborn children through induced abortion — at any time, for any reason.
Make no mistake, even when a state allows abortion at any time for any reason, abortion advocates will push for more killing.
