USA TODAY US Edition

What Texas couple wants you to know about abortion ban

- Bridget Grumet Bridget Grumet is the Austin American-Statesman’s Metro columnist.

Amanda Zurawski was losing her baby. Nothing would change that. Still, she had to wait three days to become sick enough, under Texas law, for doctors to intervene. At that point, under anti-abortion laws championed by Texas politician­s who call themselves pro-life, Zurawski faced the risk of dying.

“Having to sit with that knowledge that you’re going to lose the baby that you had worked so hard for is difficult enough,” she said. “Then being told, ‘Oh, we can’t do anything to help you until you’re incredibly sick’ ... it’s barbaric.”

To be clear, the Zurawskis blame the politician­s, not the doctors who wanted to help but feared the threat of felony charges and extortiona­te litigation.

“They know that they don’t want to be the person that (Attorney General) Ken Paxton makes an example of, for providing health care slightly prematurel­y than what’s in the law,” Josh Zurawski told me.

The Austin couple, both 35 and working for tech companies, had gone through a year and a half of fertility treatments. Then in late August, 18 weeks into the pregnancy, Amanda was diagnosed with an incompeten­t cervix – meaning the base of her uterus was opening prematurel­y, so the fetus would soon come out or an infection could take hold. The condition is responsibl­e for more than 20% of miscarriag­es in the second trimester.

Still, at the time of the diagnosis, the fetus had a faint heartbeat, and Amanda’s life was not yet in danger. Under Texas law, doctors cannot terminate a pregnancy with a fetal heartbeat unless the patient is having “a medical emergency.”

In practice, this means waiting until the mother’s condition gets worse.

It means playing chicken with the woman’s life.

After waiting three days for the inevitable miscarriag­e, Amanda suddenly deteriorat­ed: Raging fever. Dangerousl­y low blood pressure. Rapidly spreading bacterial infection, sending her body into sepsis. “I knew she was in really bad shape,” said Josh, who rushed his wife to the hospital. “I could see it.”

Doctors induced the miscarriag­e.

Then Amanda spent three days in the intensive care unit, battling the infection while family members worried about her survival. I confirmed the details of her account with her doctor and medical records she provided.

By all outward appearance­s, Amanda is healthy now. But she is still healing from the emotional wounds. And she recently had surgery to remove scar tissue that developed in her uterus from the traumatic miscarriag­e and infection.

There’s no guarantee the damage can be undone.

The scar tissue “might be permanent to the point that I can no longer carry my own children,” Amanda told me, her voice breaking with tears.

Texas governor was aware

Even before the Zurawskis’ story made news in late October, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott was aware of cases like it.

Answering a question about abortion in an interview that aired Oct. 16, Abbott acknowledg­ed there are “situations that some women are going through where they are not getting the health care they need to protect their life.”

“Too many allegation­s have been made about ways in which the lives of the mother are not being protected,” Abbott continued, “and so that must be clarified” next legislativ­e session.

Meaning: Wait a good six months, maybe longer, for officials to fix the laws that are putting lives at risk now.

The lack of urgency is astonishin­g. Dr. Jennifer Lincoln, one of the physicians who met with the Zurawskis as part of the Obstetrici­ans for Reproducti­ve Justice campaign, noted that in cases like this, “somebody can go from being healthy to dead in 30 minutes.”

In July, the Biden administra­tion told hospitals that regardless of state laws, they must provide an emergency abortion when it is “the stabilizin­g treatment necessary” to resolve a medical emergency. Many Texas doctors saw hope in that moment for much-needed clarity.

Then Paxton sued, saying the federal government couldn’t interfere with the state’s “sovereign interest” in making its own abortion laws. A federal judge sided with Paxton.

“It took away that last hope,” Dr. John Thoppil, the immediate past president of the Texas Associatio­n of Obstetrici­ans and Gynecologi­sts, told me.

The judge’s ruling was Aug. 24. Texas’ trigger ban, creating criminal penalties for abortions, went into effect Aug. 25.

Amanda Zurawski was rushed to the hospital on Aug. 26.

We don’t have a firm handle on how often cases like the Zurawskis’ are happening. But they have been on the rise over the past year since Texas enacted Senate Bill 8, which used the threat of civil lawsuits to ban abortion after fetal cardiac activity is detected.

‘People have to be on death’s door’

An article in The New England Journal of Medicine, based on interviews with 25 Texas physicians and 20 patients with pregnancy complicati­ons, documented the shift in alarming detail. Numerous doctors described sending home patients in situations like Amanda’s “only to see them return with signs of sepsis.”

One maternal-fetal medicine specialist told the authors: “People have to be on death’s door to qualify for maternal exemptions to SB 8.”

This would be a good time to see the state’s latest maternal mortality report, documentin­g how many Texans have died from pregnancy or childbirth complicati­ons. But state health officials said they’re still reviewing the data and the report, which was due Sept. 1, won’t be ready before lawmakers convene next year. It’s decidedly unfortunat­e for Texans who deserve to see the scope of the problem.

State Rep. Donna Howard, an Austin Democrat and chair of the Texas Women’s Health Caucus who has long opposed abortion restrictio­ns, said she is working on proposed language for the next session to allow for terminatio­n of failing pregnancie­s before the patient becomes dangerousl­y ill.

Part of the problem – apart from the big issue of state government legislatin­g medical care in complex situations – is that SB 8, with its narrow exception for “a medical emergency,” was drafted without input from physicians, Howard noted.

“A lot of my Republican colleagues are like the proverbial dog catching the tailpipe,” Howard told me. “They did not really fully understand what the implicatio­ns were going to be, because (an abortion ban) is something they’ve been working blindly on for years, and putting the templates for legislatio­n out there without really fully understand­ing it.”

Few exceptions, extreme enforcemen­t

But to Josh Zurawski, it wasn’t an unintended consequenc­e of the law that put his wife’s life at risk.

It was reckless indifferen­ce.

It was Republican politician­s purposeful­ly passing anti-abortion legislatio­n with few exceptions and extreme enforcemen­t to advance their political careers – positionin­g themselves to rake in campaign contributi­ons and fend off challenger­s from the right.

That’s why the Zurawskis told their story. Because these cases are happening. And Texans need to know.

“We’ve had a number of people who’ve said, ‘I don’t want to live in this state anymore,’ ” Josh told me last month, describing some people’s disgust with Texas’ politics. “And (we) said, ‘Well, you know, that there’s an election . ... Just go vote.’ ”

 ?? RICARDO BRAZZIELL/USA TODAY NETWORK ?? Amanda and Josh Zurawski at home in Austin. Amanda was having a miscarriag­e. Still, she had to wait three days to become sick enough, under Texas law, for doctors to intervene.
RICARDO BRAZZIELL/USA TODAY NETWORK Amanda and Josh Zurawski at home in Austin. Amanda was having a miscarriag­e. Still, she had to wait three days to become sick enough, under Texas law, for doctors to intervene.
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States