Another story has surfaced, claiming the deliberate killing of children in the womb needs to be legal or women will die — this time with a case of preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). And already, many in politics and the media are capitalizing on it.
What happened
Anya Cook spoke to both PEOPLE and ABC News about her harrowing experience, which took place after years of infertility. According to ABC News, Cook had experienced 17 miscarriages before getting pregnant again, this time hopeful the pregnancy would last.
But in the parking lot of a restaurant where she and her husband had gone out for dinner, her water broke.
“I literally reached down and put my hand between my legs, and I saw that it was drenched with clear fluid,” she said. “Never in my wildest dreams did I even think that that was my amniotic fluid that was leaking out of me. I still was convinced that someone threw something on me, up until Derick turned me around and said ‘Babe, there is no one here.'”
Cook was just over 15 weeks pregnant, and lives in Florida, where preborn children are protected from intentional killing by induced abortion after 15 weeks gestation.
The couple went to the hospital, where they received grim news. “[The doctor] told me in that very moment that you can get an infection, possibly sepsis and die. All I’m thinking is, ‘Well I’m at the hospital, right? I’m okay. I won’t die because I’m at the hospital,'” she said. “I looked at my husband and that’s when reality hit me, because he’s looking at me and he’s saying, ‘No, babe. I don’t think you’re understanding what the doctor is saying.’”
Cook was given antibiotics and was discharged by the hospital. “The nurse asked if she could pray for me. All I knew was that I was not going to survive what was happening,” she said, and added that she needed to get her hair done the next day. “I didn’t want my mom to have to worry about getting my locs done or having a mortuary take care of it because I knew I would die within the next two to three days.”
ABC News said she would soon find herself on the “brink of death,” but oddly, no further details about her situation were given.
Standard of care
A similar case caused international outrage in Malta, in which an American woman claimed she was unjustly denied an abortion due to PPROM. Yet there is a problem with this narrative: induced abortion is not the standard of care for PPROM.
Nowhere on Cleveland Clinic’s information page about PPROM, for example, is induced abortion (in which a child is intentionally killed) listed as a treatment for this condition. Instead, the site states, “Generally, there are two options: delivery or expectant management. Expectant management is a treatment that delays labor. This includes precautions like bed rest, medications and frequent monitoring for infection or fetal distress.”
Dr. Christina Francis, CEO of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG), also previously explained in a statement to Live Action News that the treatment for PPROM is to admit the woman for observation to monitor her for any signs of infection or bleeding — not induced abortion. “There are signs of developing intrauterine infection that any physician who is well-trained in obstetrics can identify long before sepsis develops,” she said. “This is why these patients are monitored very closely and often as inpatients, at least for a few days.”
This guidance is also recommended by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), in which the standard of care is described as careful observation and waiting. In some cases, the membranes re-seal and the amniotic fluid may stop leaking, while medication can be given to stop preterm labor and to strengthen the baby’s lungs. If infection is present, antibiotics are given. If there are signs of further complications, then early delivery would be called for — something that is legal, even in pro-life states.
But ABC News incorrectly labels early delivery “abortion care,” writing, “Had she lived in a state without restrictions on abortion care, she would have been admitted, counseled and offered an induction of labor to protect her from infection — which in this case would be considered abortion care.”
If Cook’s account is indeed true, that’s not what was done by this hospital, though the standard of care for PPROM appears to be widely known, as referenced earlier. According to ABC News, “Cook said she was discharged from the emergency room because she was not yet sick enough to qualify for the emergency medical exception in Florida’s law, despite her risk for infection and hemorrhage.”
According to the information above, the standard of care does not appear to have been followed, as Cook was not admitted to the hospital for observation, and was instead sent home with antibiotics despite reportedly being told she was at risk of sepsis and death. What kind of hospital policy would allow for such a thing? Cook should have been admitted for observation of her condition, received antibiotics for any infection, and if all other options failed, early delivery of her child was warranted, which would have been ENTIRELY LEGAL.
Induced abortion is meant to kill; early delivery is not done with the intention of killing a child, but of saving a woman’s life. If a child dies as a secondary and unintended result of early delivery, this is not an induced abortion and is not prevented by pro-life laws.
As Dr. Ingrid Skop testified, the issue is one of doctors not providing proper medical care — the issue is not pro-life laws.
Skop specifically addressed the case of a woman who experienced PPROM but was essentially left untreated and left by hospital staff to develop a life-threatening infection. In such a case, an induced abortion would have then been allowed under pro-life state law. “To be clear, because the likelihood for progression to life-threatening sepsis for the mother is high, and the prognosis for continued extra-uterine life for the fetus is poor, the law allows an exception where an abortion is necessary to preserve the ‘life of the mother,’” she said. “Offering immediate delivery by induction or by induced abortion is supported by ACOG’s medical guidance. In this rare situation, abortion is permissible by state law, as necessary to prevent the mother’s death.”
However, even then, induced abortion — direct and intentional killing of the preborn child — is not typically what a doctor would choose. Abortions in the second and third trimester typically take days to commit, whereas a C-section can be performed in less than one hour. If the mother’s life was actually at risk, a premature delivery may take place, but the targeted killing of the child is never actually medically necessary — including in cases of PPROM.
Biden exploitation
The Biden-Harris presidential campaign sent out an email on Cook’s story.
“‘On the brink of death,’ ‘dangerous life-threatening situations,’ ‘medical refugees’ – this is the horrifying reality that women across America are facing. And it’s because of Donald Trump,” Biden-Harris 2024 Deputy Communications Director Brooke Goren said in an e-mail blast. “As Trump proudly brags, it was his Supreme Court picks who provided the deciding votes to overturn Roe v. Wade, allowing Republican extremists across the country to pass draconian bans that are hurting women and threatening doctors. Because of Donald Trump, 1 in 3 women of reproductive age now live under an abortion ban. But Trump and MAGA Republicans have no plans to stop here. They want a national abortion ban. The personal stories, emerging as chaos and cruelty made possible by Trump’s work overturning Roe v. Wade continues to worsen, should not be happening in America. If Trump returns to the White House, it will only get worse.”
Goren added, “Had she lived in a state without restrictions on abortion care, she would have been admitted, counseled and offered an induction of labor to protect her from infection — which in this case would be considered abortion care.”
This is an intentional conflation of terms, which has become common among abortion advocates. Even in situations where the preborn child had already died in the womb, abortion activists are claiming that post-miscarriage treatment is the same thing as an abortion — or that an induction of labor is considered “abortion care.” There is a vast difference between intentionally killing a preborn child over a period of several days and taking life-saving steps after complications arise.
In a case where labor had to be induced early, the pregnancy can end without the child being intentionally killed. Depending on how far along the mother is, doctors may also work to save the child’s life, or give comfort care to ease their passing. This should not, however, be done with the goal of ending the child’s life — the intent should be to save the mother and the child if possible.
Comparatively, in a D&E abortion — which Cook likely would have had — the preborn child’s limbs are literally ripped from his or her torso, and the child’s skull is then crushed. Delivering a child prematurely while attempting to save both mother and baby is not an induced abortion.
Most people don’t support the unfettered killing of preborn human beings, which is why some in the political and media establishments frequently conflate a legitimate health care procedure with intentionally killing a child. Confusing the public about what abortion is and does is an effective propaganda tool.
And women don’t need to intentionally have their preborn children poisoned or dismembered to save their lives; they need doctors who are willing to put patient care above their own pro-abortion ideology instead of committing medical negligence.
