You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
4 points
*

This is not a medical error. EMTALA is not a protective law for healthcare facilities or professionals. The state can still prosecute based on their own laws, and in Texas, for example, performing an abortion can come with a lifetime sentence.

From the medical provider and hospitals standpoint, you are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Perform an abortion and face criminal charges from the state or refrain and face civil charges from the fed.

If you had the choice to face a criminal charge (prison sentence) or a civil charge (fine), which would you pick?

Texas law imposes severe criminal penalties for performing abortions. Medical professionals who perform abortions face first-degree felony charges punishable by five years to life in prison if the procedure results in fetal death. Attempting or inducing an abortion is a second-degree felony, carrying two to 20 years imprisonment. Additionally, providers face minimum civil penalties of $100,000 per violation and mandatory revocation of their medical license.
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Which federal law are you referring to? EMTALA does not supersede state law, nor does it prevent the state from pursuing criminal charges for abortion.

It’s unrealistic to expect a significant number of doctors to throw away their livelihoods and go to prison to prove a legal threat. Doctors are being advised by risk management divisions of the hospital to not even consider abortions in these cases (in certain states) because it means saying goodbye to your practice, your savings, and your family.

Texas successfully challenged EMTALA's application to abortion cases through a lawsuit in 2022. The 5th Circuit Court ruled that EMTALA does not mandate abortion care or override state law. Texas became the only state exempt from federal emergency care requirements for pregnant patients. Under Texas law, abortion is only permitted for "risk of death" rather than EMTALA's broader "serious jeopardy" to health standard

Tuesday’s ruling, authored by Judge Kurt D. Engelhardt, said the court “decline[d] to expand the scope of EMTALA.”

“We agree with the district court that EMTALA does not provide an unqualified right for the pregnant mother to abort her child,” Englehardt wrote. “EMTALA does not mandate medical treatments, let alone abortion care, nor does it preempt Texas law.”

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/02/texas-abortion-fifth-circuit/

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply

Leopards Ate My Face

!leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world

Create post

Rules:

  • If you don’t already have some understanding of what this is, try reading this post. Off-topic posts will be removed.
  • Please use a high-quality source to explain why your post fits if you think it might not be common knowledge and isn’t explained within the post itself.
  • Links to articles should be high-quality sources – for example, not the Daily Mail, the New York Post, Newsweek, etc. For a rough idea, check out this list. If it’s marked in red, it probably isn’t allowed; if it’s yellow, exercise caution.
  • The mods are fallible; if you’ve been banned or had a comment removed, you’re encouraged to appeal it.
  • For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the comments.
  • All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out !leopardsatemyface@lemm.ee (also active).

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

Community stats

  • 2.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 79

    Posts

  • 3.1K

    Comments