Texas State Sen. Brian Hughes, who enacted the much-maligned Texas Heartbeat Act, and the Texas Medical Board have stated that in the event of a medical emergency during pregnancy, Texas law requires that a doctor “take reasonable medical precautions.” He reiterated that he was authorized to make decisions based on his “individual judgment.” Hughes and the board are trying to clarify the scope of Texas’ pro-life law. recent attempts Media misrepresentation and discrediting the state of Texas and Texas health care providers.
According to reports texas, statement This document issued by Dr. Sherif Zaafran, FASA, President of the Texas Medical Board, rule Regarding the Texas pro-life law that was issued earlier this year. These rules state that Texas law provides treatment for ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages, and for treatment of ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages if the physician reasonably determines that continuing the pregnancy would endanger the mother’s life or pose a risk to major bodily functions. It explains that it allows a pregnancy to be terminated even if the mother’s life is at risk. It’s not imminent.
“When responding to an ongoing, imminent, or potential medical emergency that would kill or endanger a pregnant woman, a physician shall, in accordance with the patient’s informed consent and the oath sworn by each physician, You must make a medical judgment and do what is medically necessary, including a significant risk of serious impairment of a major bodily function, which unfortunately may include induced abortion.” The statement reads in part.
The Texas Medical Board’s statement comes after guidance has already been provided to Texas physicians in regulations issued earlier this year to address complaints about doctors who do not meet the standard of care set out in the medical board’s regulations. emphasizes that it can be submitted to the medical committee. Committee to consider investigations and measures.
The medical board notes that Texas physicians are aware of the law’s provisions. “According to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services report on induced abortions from August 2022 to June 2024, there were 119 documented cases in which care was provided under these exceptions, and to date, No doctor has ever had any disciplinary action taken against them by the state medical board.” Seek medical intervention in such cases. ”
in him statement Writing in the Houston Chronicle, Hughes noted how recent ProPublica articles about Josely Varnica and Nevaeh Crain misrepresented Texas’ pro-life laws. “I am the author of the Texas Heartbeat Law, and sadly I believe these articles were written with the intent of misrepresenting that law. Other Texas states dating back to the 1800s “Like the abortion law, the heartbeat law provides a clear exception for medical emergencies,” Hughes wrote.
Read: Fact check: Media uses story to slam Alabama’s pro-life law…but there’s a big problem
Hughes said ProPublica “argues that Texas’ abortion ban does not define a ‘medical emergency,’ leaving doctors with no guidance as to what the term means.” The reader is led to believe that.” As Hughes points out, the definition of a medical emergency during pregnancy is clearly defined. Chapter 171.002 (3) Texas Health and Safety Code Provisions.
Additionally, Texas physicians and hospitals should already be familiar with the language of the Texas Heartbeat Act. That’s because Hughes and others who drafted the law have long held onto language that has been part of Texas law. This was also pointed out in a recent Facebook video by obstetricians and gynecologists Dr. Christina Francis and Dr. Ingrid Schopf, the latter of whom practices in Texas.
Mr Hughes referred to the medical board’s opinion. clarification The law, announced in June, states that doctors may act in the event of a medical emergency, even if the mother’s life is not in immediate danger.
“Under Texas law, Bernica and Crane were in a medical emergency and doctors should have intervened to save their lives,” Hughes said.
In Varnika’s case, she was already in premature labor, but the vaccine protected her from infection for up to 40 hours and helped her safely deliver her 17-week-old child (too young to survive outside the womb). Nothing was done for it. In Crane’s case, her symptoms were misdiagnosed and she was unable to undergo obstetric tests that she should have received. Although clinical signs of sepsis were noted by the physician, she was discharged and sent home. By the time she returned to the hospital, it was too late. Her baby died and she died of sepsis shortly thereafter.
Mr Hughes said: “Sadly, the most likely explanation is that articles like this one published by ProPublica made hospitals and their doctors afraid to treat women. Pro-abortion advocates and their allies Certain left-wing media outlets persistently attempt to intimidate doctors, pregnant women, and the general public into believing that Texas law prevents doctors from helping patients and saving lives.
Hughes reiterated that most Texas physicians are aware of the exceptions provided in the law and Texas Medical Board guidance, as shown in Texas Health and Human Services data. This is not due to regular medical institutions providing guidance to doctors. . What’s especially unusual, says Texas obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Ingrid Skopf, is that medical care typically provides new rules like HIPAA and the Affordable Care Act, as well as guidance on things like how to properly prescribe opioids. The problem is that the agency does not provide any such guidance. In many cases, it even caused confusion for doctors.
Pro-life laws, including Texas law, do not prohibit chemotherapy, surgery for ectopic pregnancy, premature rupture of membranes (PPROM), an inadequate cervix, infections such as sepsis, or life-saving treatments for any health condition. . Condition or pregnancy complications. If doctors don’t understand the difference between the natural death of newborns and premature babies and the deliberate killing of those children (often by lethal injection or mutilation), the problem lies with the doctors, not the law. .
“None of the medical institutions volunteered to help doctors understand the law and, in fact, at times incited confusion and fear themselves…and in fact caused doctors to become confused and provide poor quality care. “The law is confusing,” Scope said in a video discussion with obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Christina Francis.
“I’m grateful that so many Texas doctors get this right,” said Sen. Hughes. “But it is clear that more needs to be done to make doctors and hospitals aware of the law. When a mother’s life or key bodily functions are at risk, doctors must take action. They are not only allowed, but legally required to act.” Standards of care and moral and ethical obligations compel them to act. And contrary to what ProPublica would have us believe, Texas law does not prevent them from helping patients and saving lives. ”
Call on President Trump to pardon FACE Act prisoners on his first day in office.
