The Anti-Abortion Endgame That Erin Hawley Admitted to the Supreme Court
Last edited Thu Mar 28, 2024, 10:58 AM - Edit history (1)
BY DAHLIA LITHWICK AND MARK JOSEPH STERN
MARCH 27, 2024 4:48 PM
Erin Hawley speaks to the media after oral arguments in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine on Tuesday in Washington. Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images
Somewhat lost in the debate around abortion pills and oral arguments that took place at the Supreme Court in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine on Tuesday was one deeply uncomfortable truth: The very notion of what it means to practice emergency medicine is in dispute, with anti-abortion doctors insisting upon a right to refuse treatment for any patient who doesnt meet their test of moral purity. Indeed, the right asserted is that in the absence of certainty about which patients are morally pure, the doctors want to deny medication to all patients, nationwide.
In public, the plaintiffs in this casea group of doctors and dentists seeking to ban medication abortionhave long claimed they object to ending unborn life by finishing an incomplete or failed abortion at the hospital. But in court, they went much further. Their lawyer, Erin Hawley, admitted at oral argument that her clients dont merely oppose terminating a pregnancythey are pursuing the right to turn away a patient whose pregnancy has already been terminated. Indeed, they appear to want to deny even emergency care to patients whose fetus is no longer alive, on the grounds that the patient used an abortion drug earlier in the process. And they aim to deploy this broad fear of complicity against the FDA, to demand a nationwide prohibition on the abortion pill to ensure that they need never again see (and be forced to turn away) patients whove previously taken it. This is not a theory of being complicit in ending life. It is a theory that doctors can pick and choose their patients based on the moral distress they might feel in helping them.
It should come as no surprise that the same judge who tried to ban mifepristone in this case, Matthew Kacsmaryk, has also attempted to legalize anti-LGBTQ+ discrimination in health care nationwide. This is the ballgame: weaponize subjective religious beliefs against secular society to degrade the quality of care for everyone. If you cant persuade Americans to adopt hardcore evangelical views, exploit the legal system to coerce them into it anyway.
Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine is at once embarrassingly frivolous and existentially important. Dont let the jokes about how silly the Comstock Act seems, or how speculative the theory of standing is, get in the way of taking a serious look at the claims on offer. The plaintiffs say they are terrified that one day, a patient may walk into their emergency room suffering complications from a medication abortion prescribed by some other doctor. This patient may need their assistance completing the abortion or simply recovering from the complete abortion, which these plaintiffs deem complicity in sin. And they say the solution is either a total, nationwide ban on mifepristone, the first drug in the medication abortion sequence, or a draconian (and medically unnecessary) set of restrictions that would place mifepristone out of reach for many patients. (The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled to reinstate those restrictions at their behest.)
{snip}
LastDemocratInSC
(3,647 posts)intheflow
(28,476 posts)"to zygotes. Women, we can harm them both physically and psychologically by forcing them to carry dead fetuses to term or death. Because even though Jesus never said shit about abortions, he 100% would be down with letting women die because you sit in judgement of them. What's that you say? Those without sin should cast the first stone? Doesn't apply to me and my hypocratic (hipocritical?) oath."
CrispyQ
(36,478 posts)JFC I can't believe we even allow this shit!!
Midnight Writer
(21,768 posts)She sounds like someone who enjoys being cruel.
LaMouffette
(2,036 posts)cradling my buddy in my arms for the last time and already grieving, I asked the vet how he was able to handle this necessary, but tragic task that was part of his profession. He told me, "I wish all I had to do was help kittens and puppies all day long, but you just have to accept that this part comes with the territory. It's not easy, but it's what you have to do."
I can't imagine what I would have done if the vet's office had turned us away because they felt no one should end a life except for God. Let my cat die a slow, agonizing death? Kill him myself somehow?
And this was a cat. His inevitable death did not threaten my own life or health (apart from a broken heart). I seriously don't understand how a doctor could refuse to help a woman with a life-threatening condition, no matter how that condition came about.
As others here have said, doctors who don't want to treat patients who have complications from abortions should not be doctors or just should not be emergency room doctors so that they can go off and have a private practice and pick and choose patients to their self-righteous heart's desire.
WestMichRad
(1,326 posts)
that sadly leads to an abnormally high suicide rate for those in that profession.
I wholly agree with the sentiment that medical professionals who have moral objections to treating some patients should not be allowed to practice medicine- on anyone.
LaMouffette
(2,036 posts)along with my gratitude for what they have done for me and my family of furry ones throughout our lives.
Hope22
(1,842 posts)There wasnt a dry eye in the room. Our loving vet and her vet tech were as teary as we were. My heart goes out to all of them.
LaMouffette
(2,036 posts)close bond with a cat do not realize that they are every bit as loving as a dog and so very special in their unique "cat-ness."
Warm hugs to you and your family during this tough time!
And if you are at all inclined toward the spiritual, I highly recommend the book Animals and the Afterlife, by Kim Sheridan. It helped me survive the loss of our sweet boy German Shepherd, who was, as I used to say, the "German Shepherd ambassador to the world." Not a mean bone in his 115-pound body!
Hope22
(1,842 posts)I will definitely check out Animals and the Afterlife. The Ambassador sounds like an amazing companion. Warm hugs to you as well. I feel like our animals travel the road with us and that German Shepard ambassador to the World is still right there with you. Love yo you. 💗🙏🏼
LaMouffette
(2,036 posts)years since he died. I won't go into details, but I have had a few "signs," some a little sketchy that could've easily been attributed to coincidence, but one very big one that let me know it was really him.
I hope your furry kid drops by to say hello, too!
localroger
(3,627 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,943 posts)yankee87
(2,173 posts)I can't believe this is a serious consideration of any court. My children and grandchildren will have to keep fighting to stop these fake Xtians.
OMGWTF
(3,957 posts)get the red out
(13,466 posts)What's he going to do? Demand proof a woman has never had an abortion before filling her tooth?
3Hotdogs
(12,390 posts)X-rays hurt the young zygoat
3Hotdogs
(12,390 posts)X-rays hurt the young zygoat
Lonestarblue
(10,011 posts)moonshinegnomie
(2,453 posts)that if any of these so called christians trying to ban abortion drugs violates any rules in the bible they be punished.
than includes not keeping kosher. mixing fabrics in their attire,etc.. anything that is barred in the old or new testament they get punished for doing.
and if they claim the old testatament doesnt apply they get punished as a blasphemer...
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(57,484 posts)Last Updated: March 3, 2023 135 Comments
Map created using 270 To Win, based on reddit user Taillesskangarus posts here and updated here.
The map above shows what the 2016 US Presidential Election results would have been if votes not cast for Hillary, Trump or one of the third party candidates had gone to fictional candidate Did Not Vote.
{snip}
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,349 posts)flashman13
(666 posts)One pulls out a gun and shots the other in the guts. The victim starts bleeding profusely from this very painful life threatening injury. He arrives at the ER accompanied by the police. The doctor on call at that moment is a member of the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. The doctor asks the officer what happened. The officer tells him that he was shot in a drug deal gone bad while holding a quantity of fentanyl. In a righteous shout the doctor says, "I will not treat this man because he is a sinner and I can not sully my person by saving his life". Before another doctor arrives the injured man bleeds out and dies.
So under the same argument made in the case of a medical abortion gone wrong, is it acceptable that the pious doctor allowed the man to die? We know that not only was he sinning at the time of injury, he was also taking part in a criminal act. Not only that, but he was endangering other sinning criminal drug users by pushing fentanyl. All around we will all agree he was a bad man. Does that further justify letting him die? Isn't the world better off with one less drug dealer?
Before you answer those questions let's look at a slightly different scenario. You are an emergency surgeon working in the MASH next to Hawkeye Pierce. One wounded man after another arrives at your operating table. The doctor doesn't check to see what uniform he is wearing. The doctor treats him and does his best to save his life. A wounded man is a wounded man and everyone gets treated the same regardless of the uniform. Never mind that he is "the enemy". Never mind that a hour before he had pulled the trigger and attempted to kill the wounded the man you had just treated. The doctors treat the wounded enemy not because they are covered by the Geneva Convention, but because doctors save lives because that is what they do. Something like all life is sacred.
Contrast a MASH doctor working knee deep in blood in a war zone with his sensibilities attacked every moment of the day by the madness and immorality of war, with the smug lovers of "unborn life", basically overgrown snow flakes, in a suburban ER. The first does everything he can to repair the damage. The second stands around passing judgement on his patient. Maybe war has something to teach us here.
Sorry about the length. Rant over.
LiberalFighter
(50,943 posts)And can one take the word of all police as to what actually happened?
Hope22
(1,842 posts)Her next stop is the pharmacy and once again she has to hope that the moral highness of the pharmacists allows the prescription to be filled .this is no way to live.
kimbutgar
(21,157 posts)Sounds like they are both sexually frustrated!
nakocal
(552 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,943 posts)Stargazer99
(2,585 posts)all she needed was medication and that would have stopped death but this nasty country would not see her without money-and you expect me to honor this country? apparently the monied rule if you have life or not. How much cruelty do you Republicans want? What you are capable of never satisfies you