Friday, October 14, 2011

What about a *woman's* right to live?

Every so often the House of Representatives does something which takes my breath away.  And not in a good way, either.

Yesterday, the House passed H.R. 358, the so-called "Protect Life Act." You think H.R. 3, the bill that would redefine rape for the purposes of insurance coverage of abortion, was atrocious?  This is worse.  Much worse.

Under this bill, women could die.

Currently, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTLA) requires hospitals to provide life-saving care and to stabilize patients who come through the doors of their E.R. If they cannot, they are to facilitate a transfer to another hospital.  This was originally designed so that people would not be allowed to die simply because they had no insurance or the means to pay for treatment.

H.R. 358 would exempt abortions from those requirements.  If a woman came into an ER needing an abortion to save her life, and the ER were attached to, say, a Roman Catholic hospital who refused as a matter of principle to either perform an abortion or transfer the woman, she could die.  They could legally watch her die.

Pregnancy is a hazardous business.  Sometimes an abortion is required so a woman will live.  This Daily Kos diarist describes one such scenario; and a ruptured placenta previa would be another, as would severe preeclampsia.

These bastards do not seem to care.  How they can reconcile "protecting life" when what they are doing may well cost it, is completely beyond my comprehension. It is not as though the fetus will come to term if the mother dies, is it?

Oh, I forgot.  Fetuses are more important than grown women. Silly me.

No comments:

Post a Comment