REPORTS THAT BEGGAR BELIEF…
Her fetus has no heartbeat—they still won’t give her an abortion
“South Carolina’s ban is torturing a 31-year-old mom *right now*. It’s been over a week since Elisabeth Weber found out she was miscarrying. The South Carolina mother has been told by multiple doctors—across multiple emergency room visits—that her fetus has no heartbeat. That the pregnancy is doomed. Why then, can’t she have an abortion? Why is this devastated 31-year-old being forced—right now, today—to carry a dead fetus?
“My baby is dead, they know it, and I’m still being forced to wait,” Weber says. Why? The doctors want to do a fourth ultrasound just to make sure the baby is dead. But all they can do meanwhile is apologise to her and say they know this is “not OK”. She has three children at home and is working and does not have the wherewithal to go to another US state for an abortion.
SOURCE: Jessica Valenti, Substack. 2 April 2025.
+++
California woman sues Catholic hospital chain over emergency abortion denial
A Eureka woman who nearly bled to death while miscarrying twins last year is suing the Catholic hospital chain that she claims refused her life-saving abortion care, that is, an abortion. Anna Nusslock (photo), a chiropractor, sued Providence St. Joseph Hospital Eureka and its parent companies in Humbolt Superior Court last week. She said she hopes the action will force the company’s California hospitals to follow state law.
As a Catholic hospital, however they replied: “SJH could not comply with such an order without forsaking its Catholic identity—the ultimate burden in a religious freedom case.”
Although St. Joseph’s agreed last autumn to provide emergency abortion care (in line with California law), the hospital has since reversed course, seeking to have the state DOJ suit dismissed on the grounds that compliance infringes on its 1st Amendment right to religious freedom.
“The stakes of this could not be clearer: having acknowledged that they have, and will continue to, violate a law which requires them to adequately care for patients experiencing life threatening medical emergencies, SJH now asks this Court to condone their conduct by dismissing this action,” the state wrote in opposition to the motion.
The court is set to rule on the issue May 15.
Footnote
The article summarised above also says that American hospitals have been consolidating for a long time, and an ever-growing number are now run by Catholic hospital groups. According to the Catholic Hospital Association of the United States, it says, one in seven patients in the U.S. receives care at one of their facilities, and more than 15% of American babies are born in Catholic hospital delivery rooms. This is far from new. There are several pages on Google of citations on the consequences for pregnant woman of Catholic hospitals’ unwillingness to deal with complications of pregnancy that may put the fetus at risk, let alone provide life-saving abortions (for the pregnant woman, that is), even if the fetus is dead or cannot be saved.
SOURCE: Yahoo!news, by Sonja Sharp, 2 April 2025 + PHOTO: Paul Kuroda / For The Times. This story originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.
For more on the role of Catholic hospitals in pregnancy complications, go to the link below to read a presentation I wrote in 2013 on this topic in the context of the death of Savita Halappanavar in Ireland from uterine sepsis, when her cervix opened at 18 weeks of pregnancy and the baby died in utero, but the hospital refused to do an abortion to save her life – in order to prevent the uterine sepsis — which inevitably occurred: www.nwci.ie/download/pdf/berer_catholic_health_policy_abortion_and_other_reproductive_health_care_5_mar_2013.pdf. (Editor)
… WHILE THE FOLLOWING ARE OUTRAGEOUS…
The US Supreme Court struggles with whether to wound Medicaid to spite Planned Parenthood
The case should have a clear outcome, but a Republican Court overcomplicates everything that involves abortion. Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic should be one of the easiest cases the Supreme Court will decide this year. A federal law requires every state’s Medicaid program to ensure that “any individual eligible for medical assistance” may obtain that care from a competent provider of their choice. The question in Medina is whether that statute means anything, or whether it is a paper tiger that cannot be meaningfully enforced.
In fairness, the Supreme Court’s rules laying out when a federal Medicaid statute can be enforced through private lawsuits are somewhat complicated, but the 2023 decision in Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County v. Talevski clarified those rules. There is now no serious argument that that law enabling Medicaid patients to choose their providers cannot be enforced.
SOURCE: Vox, by Ian Millhiser, 2 April 2025
+++
Supreme Court wrestles with red state (Republican Party dominated) efforts to defund Planned Parenthood
The case hinges on whether Medicaid patients have the right to see the doctor of their choice.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority appeared sympathetic Wednesday to South Carolina’s bid, backed by the Trump administration, to exclude Planned Parenthood from its Medicaid program and deny affected patients the ability to challenge that exclusion in court.
But while Planned Parenthood’s provision of abortion services outside of Medicaid is what led South Carolina to blacklist the group, abortion was rarely mentioned in over nearly two hours of arguments.
SOURCE: Politico, by Alice Miranda Ollstein, Josh Gerstein, 2 April 2025
++++
Planned Parenthood is in a crisis — and the Supreme Court could make it worse
As the second Trump administration enacts more of its policy goals, abortion opponents are trying to starve abortion providers of any federal funding.
Last month, Planned Parenthood of Greater New York announced it will list its Manhattan clinic building for sale due to budget shortfalls, a move that would leave the national organization with zero presence in the borough where it was founded a century ago. It was the most visible sign of the crisis that has hit Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers since the end of Roe v. Wade. With Trump back in office, that crisis could intensify even further — starting at the Supreme Court.
SOURCE: MSNBC, by Susan Rinkunas, 2 April 2025
+++
Nevada to now require parental notification for minors’ abortions after court lifts 40-year pause. The law will take effect April 30
Nevada’s long-dormant law requiring minors to give parental notification before undergoing an abortion will go into effect at the end of the month, after a federal judge lifted an injunction that prevented the law from ever being enforced. U.S. District Court Judge Anne Traum ruled that the new policy will take effect April 30.
Nevada has had a law since 1985 requiring parental notification — or judicial bypass of the notification requirement — for physicians to perform abortions on minors. But the law has never been enforced because federal courts enjoined it before it took effect.
SOURCE: The Nevada Independent, by Gabby Birenbaum, 1 April 2025
Thanks to Joyce Arthur for sharing so much USA news!!