Due to a restrictive new anti-abortion law in Missouri, health care providers in the state are reportedly waiting until ectopic pregnancies become dangerous to provide medical treatment — despite the fact that such pregnancies are known to be painful, nonviable and potentially fatal to those who experience them.
In 2019, Republican lawmakers in the state passed a “trigger ban”The following information would apply to abortions that would become effective if Roe v. WadeThe 1973 Supreme Court landmark decision protecting abortion rights was overturned. This precedent was overturned by the Court last week. state Attorney General Eric Schmitt certified in a legal opinion that the trigger ban is now in effect.
The new law bans the induction or execution of an abortion on another person and makes no exceptions for incest or rape. An abortion can only be performed when a person’s health or life is in danger, it stipulates.
But the Missouri law doesn’t specifically define when a pregnancy is deemed dangerous, one of the many ambiguities in the law that may make it difficult for health care providers to determine if an abortion can legally take place.
Ectopic pregnancies occur when a fertilized egg implants in an area outside of the uterusUsually within the fallopian tube. These types of pregnancies, which are usually not viable, can cause severe discomfort if left untreated. or even deathFor someone who is currently experiencing one. Ectopic pregnancies may also make it difficult to become pregnant in the future.
Ectopic pregnancies need to be treated quickly. They may resolve themselves in rare cases, but they are not common enough to cause serious complications.
However, patients are being told that due to the Missouri law’s wording, they have to wait until they are in greater danger to have an abortion. Jane van Dis, an assistant professor of Obstetrics at the University of Rochester, said this.
Missouri’s trigger ban specifically states that an abortion can only occur if a person’s pregnancy “create[s] a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” In the early stages of an ectopic pregnancy, such a serious risk may not be documentable.
“We are now observing patients with ectopic pregnancy and hemoperitoneum until they have a documented falling hemoglobin or unstable vital signs,” van Dis wrote in a tweet on TuesdayCiting information from a Missouri colleague.
Those who support reproductive rights have condemned Missouri’s new law.
“If he wanted to, @AGEricSchmitt could issue an opinion letter TODAY defining ‘medical emergency’ in a way that would save lives,” wrote Democratic state Rep. Sarah Unsicker. “If he wanted to. He should affirmatively state what he will not prosecute as an abortion.”
“This is like going to the doctor with appendicitis, doctor confirming appendicitis, and then waiting for your appendix to burst and poisoning your bloodstream before taking it out,” author Patrick S. Tomlinson said. “It’s medical malpractice.”
According to bioethicist and surgeon Louise Perkins King, medical professionals’ fears of being prosecuted for performing abortions too early in ectopic pregnancies are warranted.
“I’m sorry to report that ectopic pregnancy is absolutely in play” under the law, she said in a tweetThat was part of a larger discussion thread on the matter.
In subsequent posts, Perkins King elaborated:
Legally a “medical emergency” is a current not expected emergency. So the defense is that standard of care demands treatment ahead of emergent circumstances being actively present – but that violates the law. … Even with the language re reasonable judgment/medical emergency. If I was in a restrictive situation, I would still be able to treat it. However, I would also be open to following the example of others.
“So damned if I do, damned if I don’t,” Perkins King added. “And that’s the point with so much legislation that limits the rights of pregnant persons.”