Which abortions are they defining as not abortions?
This is a weird fight. There does not appear to be any meaningful legal or profit difference whether terminating an ectopic pregnancy is a permitted abortion or an exempt “not an abortion”. The thread title is (predictably) misleading. Whatever profit is earned on ectopic pregnancies will remain.
Cite? Actually, this claim calls for several cites.
Note that the law doesn’t just cover drugs. It covers drugs and devices. And I’m not a doctor, and I don’t know what the usual method is of treating an ectopic pregnancy, but I’d be willing to bet a large sum of money that it always involves the use of at least one drug or device. Under the plain text of this law, then, a doctor that treats an ectopic pregnancy is committing a felony. And this is not a mistake, needing to be corrected on edit: It’s clearly the exact intent of the law.
This is wrong. It may behoove you to read the thread before participating, since this point has been made several times (including twice by me, but also by other posters who, I guess, you may be more inclined to read).
The plain text of the law prohibits “trafficking” the drugs/devices used to perform an otherwise illegal abortion.
So your claim is false in, at least, two respects. First, it does not make any abortion procedure illegal. Second, there seems to be general agreement in this thread that, under the different provision of Missouri law broadly criminalized performing abortions, it would not be illegal to perform one on a woman with an ectopic pregnancy.
Actually, so did a good friend. She’s still trying to make a baby, too. That ectopic pregnancy has so far been her only pregnancy, despite a lot of attempts, including IVF.
Except, from the viewpoint of someone who thinks abortion is murder because it takes a human life (and, whatever soul thing they think is going on), an abortion due to an ectopic pregnancy has exactly the same effect on the fetus (or whatever stage of development it is) as a regular abortion.
Not terminating the ectopic pregnancy is likely to to ‘murder’ the mother. That’s preferable to a therapeutic abortion which saves the mothers life?
There’s an update:
What’s in the preview box hits the high points.
I’m not sure what you mean by “trafficking”, but
Sounds like the doctor who prescribes the drugs and the pharmacist who delivers them are both guilty, or would have been.
I wonder what the final law will say.
Was that prescribed by a doctor? This site say ectopic pregnancy is a contraindication for the abortion pill:
“…Absolute contraindications include the following: the presence of an ectopic pregnancy, as MIFE/MISO [mifepristone/misoprostol] will not work and surgery is more appropriate”
From that article:
Health Canada approved the use of mifepristone/misoprostol (MIFE/MISO) for medical abortion (MA), thus improving access to abortion services.
These are not the drug most commonly used to therapeutically treat an ectopic pregnancy. Methotrexate is (… again).
I used “trafficking” as a shorthand because that’s what the bill calls it. The bill is expansive in the behavior and drugs/devices it reaches. It likely reaches the prescriber, and the pharmacist, and possibly the drug distributor and even the manufacturer. But it imposes liability only on those people when the drugs, devices, etc. are used for an abortion that is performed “in violation of any state or federal law.”
That is, based on the plain language, the law makes it illegal to obtain or provide the drugs/devices used in performing an abortion that is illegal under some other provision of law. It is simply inaccurate to claim that the language, by its own terms, outlaws any abortion, much less criminalizes the performing of an abortion in the case of ectopic pregnancy.
I made that point as clearly as I could in this post above.
And then the law goes on to make abortion of an ectopic pregnancy a felony, thus “an abortion in violation of state law”.
No, it doesn’t.
That absolutely could happen (although I doubt it *) - but this bill doesn’t do it.
* How should I put this? - I doubt it will happen because many of the people who want to punish women realize that not all the women with ectopic pregnancies are the ones they want to punish. After all, their God-fearing wife/daughter/sister might have an ectopic pregnancy
Methotrexate is not used to induce an abortion. It’s used to destroy the placenta, if surgery is deemed unnecessary or inadvisable, and because ectopic pregnancies run the risk of being malignant (i.e. choriocarcinoma), it basically “shrivels things up.”
A single low-dose IM injection (IIRC about 10 to 15mg, a tiny fraction of the dose used to treat cancer) usually does the job.
Yes, both my DIL and my friend saw a number of doctors who collectively oversaw their treatment for ectopic pregnancies, which were treated with drugs.
My DIL was explicitly given the choice of drugs or surgery. My friend didn’t share as much with me, but i do remember that she was taking methotrexate, because she talked about having to delay getting vaccinated for covid until she was off the methotrexate. (It inhibits the immune system, and her doctor wanted her to wait until she could mount a robust immune response to the vaccine.)
I’m not sure what drugs they gave my DIL, but i know she needed more than one dose. That may have been because the first dose wasn’t as effective as they hoped, and she may have been on multiple drugs. But i know that she had to have more than one treatment.
My comment stated that abortion pills don’t work for ectopic pregnancy. If you go to a doctor and ask for an abortion pill prescription they aren’t going to give you Methotrexate. They will prescribe mifepristone or misoprostol.
It’s a medicine used to kill an embryo, so I’m pretty sure the bill covers it.