Expect the same approach for limiting or eliminating vaccinations, access to birth control, loss of doctors and hospitals in rural areas, reduced or eliminated health care funding, etc.
The best way to defend bad decisions is to limit, eliminate or restrict access to the information and voices that share that evidence that proves it was a bad decision.
To the US Right, women exist to make babies, and secondarily to raise those babies and clean and cook. If a woman fails at that primary job — miscarriage, fetus dies and doesn’t miscarry, child is born disabled, etc — then that’s her fault and they don’t want to waste money on a failure, whether that’s assisting with the miscarriage so she can live or supporting the sick or disabled child.
Something not covered by this particular study is that OB/GYNs decide it’s not worth practicing in TX. So they leave the state with fewer doctors that can help a woman carry a healthy pregnancy to term.
Sometimes you need to kill women to prove the need for the 2A.
Oh, wait, sorry, wrong topic!
/s
Seriously, my mother was a nurse in the 50s and participated in illegal abortions under the guise of other procedures. People with means will always be able to get an abortion if they want one. Either under the guise of another procedure or traveling to where it’s legal.
Anti-abortion laws disproportionately affect low income women.
That’s the point. That’s what they’re trying to do.
Comments
Expect the same approach for limiting or eliminating vaccinations, access to birth control, loss of doctors and hospitals in rural areas, reduced or eliminated health care funding, etc.
The best way to defend bad decisions is to limit, eliminate or restrict access to the information and voices that share that evidence that proves it was a bad decision.
They note at the end that the raw data they used for this report is not being maintained. Because erasing data is key to avoiding oversight
This was the plan all along, killing women.
I’m sure Texas lawmakers will take this study to heart 🙄
They know the impact without studying it. The key is that they don’t care. They consider women to be disposable.
the policy hurts women.
it is working as intended.
To the US Right, women exist to make babies, and secondarily to raise those babies and clean and cook. If a woman fails at that primary job — miscarriage, fetus dies and doesn’t miscarry, child is born disabled, etc — then that’s her fault and they don’t want to waste money on a failure, whether that’s assisting with the miscarriage so she can live or supporting the sick or disabled child.
It’s as simple and horrifying as that.
Something not covered by this particular study is that OB/GYNs decide it’s not worth practicing in TX. So they leave the state with fewer doctors that can help a woman carry a healthy pregnancy to term.
Sometimes you need to kill women to prove the need for the 2A.
Oh, wait, sorry, wrong topic!
/s
Seriously, my mother was a nurse in the 50s and participated in illegal abortions under the guise of other procedures. People with means will always be able to get an abortion if they want one. Either under the guise of another procedure or traveling to where it’s legal.
Anti-abortion laws disproportionately affect low income women.
That’s the point. That’s what they’re trying to do.
I saw an article on NPR this morning on abortion bans in Texas and a rise in property crime rates. It was interesting.
I feel bad for any woman living in a red state… your government hates you.
Red states are hell