Attorneys for North Dakota Appeal Ruling Blocking ‘Heartbeat’ Abortion Ban


Attorneys for the State of North Dakota have appealed a federal court ruling that permanently blocked a state law that would have banned abortions as early as six weeks of pregnancy.

HB 1456 was one of anti-abortion measures passed by lawmakers last year and would have prohibited abortions after a fetal heartbeat was detected, which can be as early as six weeks into pregnancy. The law, considered to be among the most extreme in the nation, would have subjected any physician who knowingly violated the ban to felony charges punishable by up to five years in prison.

In April, U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland permanently blocked the measure from taking effect, calling it “invalid and unconstitutional.” Following the ruling, more than 60 North Dakota anti-choice lawmakers sent a letter to state Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem urging him to appeal the ruling.

David Brown, a staff attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights, which represents the state’s only abortion clinic in challenging the law, told RH Reality Check that the appeal was to be expected. “The appeal is not a big surprise,” said Brown. “After the hearing, the attorneys for the state announced they’d appeal if the judge ruled against them, which he did.”

“But it remains the case that no federal court has ever upheld a pre-viability ban, let alone one as extreme as this one,” he added.

Given the clear precedent that pre-viability abortion bans are not constitutional and that the decision to file an appeal is a discretionary one, Brown said it’s a question of how many resources the state is willing to use to defend the law. As reported by RH Reality Check, from January 2011 to December 2013 the state spent nearly $230,000 in taxpayer money on attorneys’ fees defending anti-choice measures. Meanwhile, at the request of Stenehjem, the state set aside $400,000 in 2013 to defend anti-choice restrictions in court.

Stenehjem said in a statement that the ruling banning the law from taking effect was to be expected, but that the purpose of the law, and the appeal, was to try and force the federal courts to re-examine the constitutionality of pre-viability abortion bans. “While Judge Hovland’s ruling was not unexpected, and is understandable given controlling case law, the Legislature passed the law in hopes that a higher court would revisit the issue,” Stenehjem said. “The office of Attorney General was created for the purpose of representing the state, including defending legislative enactments in court, and that is what my duty requires of me. It seems prudent that an appellate court should have an opportunity to consider the issue rather than have one judge overturn the judgment of the Legislative Assembly.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in St. Louis will hear the appeal, with oral arguments expected to take place sometime in the fall.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

Follow Jessica Mason Pieklo on twitter: @hegemommy

  • fiona64

    More politicians practicing medicine without a license …

    • Pinkladyapple

      If this ridiculous law were ever passed the results could be disastrous. Poor women will definitely be affected whereas women with the financial means could just travel out of state for their procedures.Many women could be denied life saving abortions because doctors will refuse to perform them for fear of legal repercussions if the fetus has a detectable heartbeat, such as ectopic pregnancies.Soon enough there will be an uptick of county hospital ers being flooded with hemorrhaging women after DIY abortions.

      • fiona64

        Exactly.

  • lady_black

    They want many Savita Halappanavars. Isn’t that the same reason they let her die?

    • ChrisFFs

      A blood infection let her die. FYI.

      Aren’t you a nurse?

      • lady_black

        People killed by medical neglect die from all sorts of causes. The medical neglect was caused by the idea that abortion should be illegal, even to save the mother’s life. They refused to treat her ONLY because she was a woman who was pregnant and experiencing a complication that required aborting the pregnancy. The same thing is happening in Catholic hospitals in this country. Shame on you.

        • ChrisFFs

          Shame on you for propagating the myth that she died because she didn’t get an abortion.

          The infection predated the abortion. It was the infection that caused the abortion not the other way around. If you were a decent medical professional, you would have been able to determine that and not spread falsehoods about her cause to make some lame political point.

          • lady_black

            The infection only predated the abortion BECAUSE THE ABORTION WAS NOT DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER. When she was admitted, she had ruptured membranes and should have been aborted immediately. In an 18 week pregnancy, that is an “inevitable abortion.” Neither mother nor fetus will survive if the miscarriage isn’t completed. Rupture of the membranes and cervical dilation compromises the sterile cavity, and leads to infection. I know that, you know that, the doctors treating her knew that, and Savita knew it too.

          • ChrisFFs

            Let’s be clear about this. The infection predated the RUPTURE OF MEMBRANES. The fact that they waited to proceed with the abortion until the heart beat stopped certainly didn’t help things. But the thing that would have saved her live would have been administration of broad spectrum antibiotics. Not the abortion. Only a nurse would think that. Go back to school.

            Shame on you.

          • lady_black

            No the infection did NOT predate the ruptured membranes. That is physiologically IMPOSSIBLE. The intact amniotic membrane is a sterile sac inside a sterile cavity. Infection cannot happen because there are no microbes in a sterile space. Women do not spontaneously develop septic pregnancies.

          • fiona64

            It’s 5×5, baby …

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, the guy who thinks that you can insert an IUD yourself just like a tampon. He’s never been very bright. .

          • lady_black

            He also believes the IUD need not be sterile when placed, and in fact cannot be placed in a sterile condition. In other words, he’s a bonehead.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, yes he is.

          • ChrisFFs

            A bonehead that just schooled you on the chronology of events in theSavita Halappanavar case.

          • lady_black

            No you did not. There was no infection when she checked into the hospital.

          • ChrisFFs

            You don’t think an elevated white count is indicative of an infection?

            You’re NOT a good nurse. You’re going to hurt somebody.

          • Ramanusia

            You’re basing your ignorant rants on blood counts taken AFTER she’d been sitting in a hospital for hours after her second trip to the hospital where SHE was the one who insisted on being examined because she was a more competent medical professional than any one at that hospital?

            You don’t seem to know what elevates a white count or why it matters when one takes a blood test. You’re not a good medical professional at all. How many people have you already hurt?

          • ChrisFFs

            I’m the one saying that high WBC were elevated and they should have treated her with abx when she first came in and you’re telling me that’s not the correct answer?

            Ok.

          • Ramanusia

            Right, but you’re also the one make asinine assumptions about why it was elevated, and proving to be utterly ignorant about the sequence of events that blow a giant hole in your theory.

            There was no infection when she was admitted, and no one BUT you is stating otherwise. So yes, I’m telling you once again that the facts don’t support your fiction, and that you are indeed incorrect.

            I’m glad you agree.

          • ChrisFFs

            I’ve explained this before, and it looks like I’m going to have to explain this to you again.

            Her elevated WBC was noted BEFORE her SROM.

            Got that? Here you made need a little help.

            1. Page 28: 1st WBC taken 16.9 at 1833 on 21st of October.

            2. Her SROM wasn’t until 6 hours later at 0030 on the 22nd.

            hse . ie/eng/services/news/nimtreport50278 . pdf

          • lady_black

            That DOESN’T MATTER. The cervix does not belong effaced and open to the extent that the membranes are bulging so badly into he vagina that they can’t even determine how far she’s dilated, or insert a speculum. Does that sound normal to you? It leads me to believe that she had already experienced a high tear in the membranes that caused the severe bulging. Like a balloon deflating slowly. Keeping her in that condition made things much worse than they needed to get, and they did it out of fear of legal sanctions for doing the right thing in treating her. Because the doomed fetus had a heartbeat. Disgusting.

          • Ramanusia

            A bonehead just proved how unschooled he was on the chronology of events in the Savita Halappanavar case and on medicine and biology in general.

            The bonehead has been proven to be an ignorant liar, who it appears cannot be taught anything given the aversion to truth, facts or simple logic.

          • expect_resistance

            No.

          • ChrisFFs

            Yup.

            Starts on page 22. Enjoy the reading assignment.

            hse . ie/eng/services/news/nimtreport50278 . pdf

          • expect_resistance

            Sorry not how it works little man. You don’t give me orders. Capisce.

          • ChrisFFs

            Oh, so you didn’t read it.

            Interesting that you’re debating the content of a report that you didn’t read.

          • expect_resistance

            You do it all the time here so you shouldn’t have a problem with that. I’m not interested in any of the lying crap you regurgitate. You have proven yourself to be a liar and your are abusive to the regulars here.

          • Libby Reale

            Lady black schooled you. You’re the only one who thinks you’re smart.

          • ChrisFFs

            Did she school me by not reading the chronology of events in the report and then claiming that this woman’s abortion caused the infection, when, in fact, it was the opposite?

          • Libby Reale

            Um, no. It was the LACK of an abortion that caused the infection.

          • ChrisFFs

            I already said I was. Good job.

          • Ramanusia

            Oh, that liar who’s failing out of medical school because s/he just doesn’t understand how biology works.

          • ChrisFFs

            She had an infection when she came to the hospital on the 21st.

            Her membranes ruptured on the 22nd.

            How is that not predating? Please explain.

          • lady_black

            OMG, I am done with you 5×5. Her cervix was wide open, and the membranes were bulging almost to the point of being outside her body with no signs of infection when she presented at the hospital. Those are grossly abnormal findings, consistent with inevitable abortion and probable undetected membrane rupture. In any event the next morning they knew damn well the membranes were ruptured. They let her lay there for six days with ruptured membranes, taking a “wait and see” approach because the fetus had a heartbeat. That’s UNACCEPTABLE. End of discussion. They murdered her.

          • ChrisFFs

            I know you’re done. Because it’s hard to admit that you’re wrong. It’s funny that you switched from “No the infection did NOT predate the ruptured membranes. That is physiologically IMPOSSIBLE.” (which isn’t true) to “In any event the next morning they knew damn well the membranes were ruptured.”

            She had an elevated white count when she came to the hospital. Is that “no sign of infection” to a nurse? Yikes. I hope you don’t work in the ICU.

            ” Infection was the most likely cause of the patient’s miscarriage”

            That is what the DOCTORS say. Not what the nurse says.

            hse.ie/eng/services/news/nimtreport50278 . pdf

          • lady_black

            I read that. It doesn’t say what you think it says.

          • lady_black

            Oh and by the way, ALL pregnant women have an elevated white count. You’re welcome.

          • ChrisFFs

            Not to 16, in the second trimester they don’t. You’re welcome.

          • lady_black

            The clinician treating her at admission stated that there were no clinical signs of infection, and that infection wasn’t a concern. Now, if you want to go with that “infection at admission” story (and I already said it was possible because her cervix had obviously opened), that begs the question of why something wasn’t done sooner. The WBC cell count wasn’t terribly elevated at the time. There were no clinical signs of infection at the time, which is more important than a cell count. Let’s assume there was an infection getting started. Why keep her pregnant so the infection enters her blood stream? Hmmm? The report said clearly because of Irish law. Irish law is WRONG, and was changed in response to this incident. Or didn’t you realize that?

          • ChrisFFs

            ” that begs the question of why something wasn’t done sooner.”

            Because of incompetence in diagnosing and treating the infection, which she obviously had and was missed.

            “Delay or refusal to terminate the pregnancy does not in itself seem to be the cause of death. Even if the law permitted it, it is not as if her life would have been saved because of termination. Severe septicaemia with disseminated intravascular coagulation
            (DIC), a life-threatening bleeding disorder which is a complication of sepsis, major organ damage and loss of the mother’s blood due to severe infection, is the cause of death in Savita’s case. This is what seems to have happened and this is a sequence which cannot be reversed just by terminating the pregnancy.” –Dr. Hema Divakar

            But your reaction is that she would have been saved if it weren’t for that pesky Irish law. And many people disagree with you and think that you are trying to use her death as a political tool. Which you are.

          • lady_black

            OF COURSE it can’t be stopped just by terminating the pregnancy. The doctor is using political speech here and deflecting from the issue. The point gets diced up, tossed around and lost in all the bullshit. The report is very clear about the effect of Irish law. Here’s the Catch 22. Irish law doesn’t permit abortion based on the possibility of future risk to the mother. This is clearly stated in the report. But by the time her condition had deteriorated enough, it was already too late. When she entered the hospital, she wasn’t a clinically ill person. But her *risk* for becoming one was very high because of her specific complication. They did absolutely the worst thing possible by keeping her pregnant. And of course she should have been treated prophylactically with a broad-spectrum antibiotic. But primary is removing the source of the infection. Hey, they could have done both at the same time! But don’t try to shuck and jive me and tell me denying her an abortion had nothing to do with it. And don’t try to tell me the law had nothing to do with it. The law sets up the Catch 22.

          • ChrisFFs

            The law had NOTHING to do with the failure to catch and treat her bacterial infection earlier. None.

          • Shan

            But the reason behind the law did.

          • ChrisFFs

            That makes zero sense.

          • Shan

            “That makes zero sense.”

            That’s because you’re not at any personal risk due to any similar laws or the cultural assumptions behind them.

          • ChrisFFs

            Again, your comment zero relation at all to my comment. Stay focused.

          • Shan

            Sorry you can’t get there from here. Not my fault.

          • ChrisFFs

            No it is your fault.

            Do you know what a non-sequitur is?

          • Shan

            A ChrisFFs.

          • ChrisFFs

            OK, I’m done replying to you.

            At least lady_black brings a solid argument to the table even though I disagree with her.

            You bring jack squat. Later.

          • Shan

            Good luck with that.

          • expect_resistance

            Poor baby. To hot for you in the kitchen.

          • Arekushieru

            Hmm, so you will be able to experience a pregnancy that will result in a miscarriage that will remain untreated due to a law that will restrict your right to determine who uses your body and when and how it is used via ongoing, informed and explicit consent, some day? Wow, just how far from reality DO you antis live?

          • ChrisFunguy79

            Aren’t you a guy? Guys don’t have miscarriages.

          • Jennifer Starr

            She’s not a guy, and you have failed to make any sort of valid point.

          • ChrisFunguy79

            He looks like a guy. And guys aren’t allowed to have opinion about abortion since they can’t get one.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Not a guy. Maybe you want to get your eyes checked.

          • ChrisFunguy79

            Looks like James May from Top Gear.

            I think James is a man.

            You look like a cat. Meow.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Well, you’re just some sad-act MRA sockpuppet with an Amanda obsession, so we already know that brains are not your best quality.

          • ChrisFunguy79

            What’s MRA?

          • Jennifer Starr

            And once again, not much brainpower.

          • ChrisFunguy79

            Oh you don’t know either?

            That’s cool.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Oh, I know. And you could find out with a minimum amount of effort. But if you like, we could always replace MRA in that sentence and call you a sad-act stalker sockpuppet with an Amanda obsession. Does that suit you better?

          • ChrisFunguy79

            That’s not a very nice thing to write.

            Y r u so mean spirited?

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, this is me being amazingly civil to yet another dull as dishwater sockpuppet. Enjoy.

          • Jennifer Starr

            You look like a sad-act sockpuppet and stalker. Pitiful.

          • ChrisFunguy79

            I like sock puppets. They are funny. My sister used to do this thing with socks puppet and voices…..it was hilarious.

          • fiona64

            It’s just 5×5 again …

          • expect_resistance

            Great example!

          • fiona64

            I know, right? You can explain it all day long to little teenaged boys in their mommy’s basements, but you cannot understand it for them.

          • lady_black

            Yes it did. The infection should never have gotten to that point if they had promptly terminated the INFECTED PREGNANCY while a stat C&S was being done, and then treated her with the appropriate antibiotic. Does it really make sense to you to treat with antibiotics while allowing her to remain with ruptured membranes and an open cervix which were the cause of the infection, and a risk for further infection? If that makes sense to you, there’s something wrong with you. BOTH have to be done.

          • ChrisFFs

            The DOCTOR disagrees with your assessment, NURSE.

          • lady_black

            No he does not.

          • expect_resistance

            Thank you for explaining although little asshat won’t comprehend.

            Irish law IS wrong. What disturbs me is that Savita’s rights as a person were second to that of a fetus. I’m pissed off at how the antis treated her family, what jerks.

          • ChrisFFs

            Yes, the Irish law is wrong.

            And it had nothing to do with her death.

          • Shan

            “And it had nothing to do with her death.”

            Whether the law itself did or not, the assumptions it was based on definitely did.

          • ChrisFFs

            And what is that assumption?

            That you shouldn’t diagnose bacterial infections earlier?

            Because that’s why she died. Not from being refused an abortion.

          • Shan

            “And what is that assumption?”

            That was explained way earlier. By Ladyblack, I believe. I’ll go back and find it for you if I can be bothered after a bit.

          • Shan

            Oh, here you go.

            “They refused to treat her ONLY because she was a woman who was pregnant and experiencing a complication that required aborting the pregnancy.”

          • Ramanusia

            It’s a bit hard to diagnose a bacterial infection that isn’t present at the time of examination. She died because she contracted a nosocomial infection while she was being denied a D&C.

          • fiona64

            Um, dumbass? I already linked you to the article WRT the inquest, in which it was plainly stated that being denied an abortion is what killed her.

          • ChrisFFs

            Yeah too bad the HSE report doesn’t agree with you.

          • lady_black

            Nosocomial infection: Caused by staff (as opposed to staph). She acquired the infection while at the hospital due to the compromised protective status of her genital tract. Ascending infection of the genital tract: pathogens introduced from the outside environment, per vagina.

          • Ramanusia

            The inquest and the medical community as well the medical facts say that you’re wrong.

            As usual pretty much everything says you’re wrong.

          • ChrisFFs

            “Delay or refusal to terminate the pregnancy does not in itself seem to
            be the cause of death. Even if the law permitted it, it is not as if her
            life would have been saved because of termination. Severe septicaemia
            with disseminated intravascular coagulation
            (DIC), a
            life-threatening bleeding disorder which is a complication of sepsis,
            major organ damage and loss of the mother’s blood due to severe
            infection, is the cause of death in Savita’s case. This is what seems to
            have happened and this is a sequence which cannot be reversed just by
            terminating the pregnancy.” –Dr. Hema Divakar

            Oh, and the microbiologist at the hospital agrees with me. Ya know, the one who is an expert on infections. His name in James Clair.

          • lady_black

            What we are saying, dumbass, is that the situation should NEVER have been allowed to deteriorate to the point where she has septicemia with DIC. When she entered the hospital, she was not septic. The doctor is equivocating here by not pointing that out.

          • expect_resistance

            Like hell it didn’t have anything to do with her death.

          • lady_black

            The report makes crystal clear that the law contributed to her death by it’s Catch 22 implications. I already explained this to you. She entered the hospital as a basically healthy 31 year old primigravida with a completely effaced and at least partially dilated cervix with bulging membranes hanging out almost to the introitus. That’s the exterior vaginal opening for you, dumb shit. Presenting in that condition, it ought to at least be suspected that a high membrane rupture had occurred. (The membranes do not always rupture with a gush or trickle from the lower part of the sac.. They can also rupture near the top of the sac, in which case there may be no leaking PV).So much of the amniotic sac was hanging out of her that they were unable to determine how far she was dilated for fear of further damage. She should have been induced immediately. However, the law at the time said that the mother had to be in *immediate* danger of death, because the fetus still had a heartbeat. By the time she WAS in immediate danger of death, the infection had entered her bloodstream and it was already too late. That’s what’s known as a Catch 22. You’re fucked if you do and fucked if you don’t. THAT’S what the problem is with the law. And don’t think it can’t happen here if any of these ridiculous “heartbeat laws” are ever allowed to stand. You’ll have doctors dithering trying to decide if she’s really “close enough” to death that they won’t be risking jail time, and it will be too late for many women by the time she IS close enough to death. That’s a woman-killing law.

          • ChrisFFs

            “She entered the hospital as a basically healthy 31 year old”

            Healthy 31-year-olds don’t miscarry at 17 weeks. Try again.

          • lady_black

            Sure they do. Healthy women miscarry at any stage of pregnancy. Now you’re blaming her for what happened. Yes, she was a healthy woman losing a pregnancy. Happens all the time.

          • ChrisFFs

            Healthy women don’t die of sepsis, idiot.

          • expect_resistance

            Again bullshit. Shut up.

          • fiona64

            Yeah, dummy, they do. Miscarriages happen regardless of the health status of the woman.

          • ChrisFFs

            A person, like Savita, who has a miscarriage because she is septic, is by definition, not healthy.

            Care to try again?

          • fiona64

            Let me make this pefectly clear: SAVITA GOT AN INFECTION BECAUSE THE PLACENTA PREVIA WAS NOT TREATED … BECAUSE TO DO SO, SHE WOULD HAVE HAD TO UNDERGO AN ABORTION. AN ABORTION THAT THE INQUEST DETERMINED WOULD HAVE SAVED HER LIFE.

            And your assertion was that healthy women don’t miscarry — which is blatantly incorrect.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Healthy women miscarry all the time, for a variety of reasons. The hospital’s failure to immediately complete a miscarriage which was already in progress is what killed her.

          • expect_resistance

            Like hell they don’t dumbass. Holy crap your stupid. Shut up and stop embarrassing yourself already.

          • expect_resistance

            Bullshit. Oh shut up you little abusive brat.

          • Ramanusia

            It’s funny how you keep getting your rear handed to you and then “your welcoming” those who keep defeating you.

          • ChrisFFs

            Her WBC were 16.9.

            Page 28.

          • Arekushieru

            WHAT do you NOT fucking get about high white blood counts typically being present during pregnancy??? That MEANS that every pregnant woman with a high white blood count has an infection, by YOUR logic. But that is NOT the fucking case.

          • ChrisFFs

            16,9 is not typical, asshat. Read the report.

          • Ramanusia

            She might have had an infection. Her neutrophil count was high. For a woman who’d been sitting around a hospital for hours on two separate visits to the hospital when she was not examined properly, that could indicate infection. One that had been picked up a few hours earlier, especially when a woman is in particularly vulnerable state where her amniotic sac was already breached.

            There is no logic here that supports 5×5′s claim, which is why he keeps making up nonsense to excuse the killing.

          • Arekushieru

            Yes, I’m aware of that. But 5X5 insists that high WBCs are indicative of infection in order to prove his case. I’m pointing out that that isn’t necessarily the case, so his point is incorrect. That’s *all* I was saying….

          • Ramanusia

            What time was this blood drawn?

            And why did the admitting doctor state unequivocally that:

            “on admission I could find no clinical evidence of infection” (footnote page 26).

            Or page 25 where he states there was no cloudiness upon examination which the footnote states:

            “This refers to the fact that fluid seen through the bulging membranes was not cloudy, suggesting there was little possibility of infective material.”

            Pg 28 refers to a high neutrophil count, which is not the hallmark of a STANDING infection, but exposure to infection of a matter of hours. Failing immuno too, huh?

            Hours after she came into the ER when she was finally admitted, she had an increase in neutrophils, just a little over the reference value of the WBC? Gee, if you actually knew some medicine (which the nurses were able to grok, but you were not), you might realize why you lose on every count in your defense of the murder of this woman for political reasons by a criminal act.

          • Ramanusia

            She’s done because you can’t refute her statements and you can’t admit you’re wrong no matter how often your nose is rubbed into your mistakes.

            She didn’t switch anything, she was just addressing your latest ignorant statement.

            You can’t make the statement that she had an elevated white count when she arrived at the hospital because you have no proof of when the labwork was done, and you don’t seem to actually KNOW the sequence of events here. The assumptions you’re making won’t save your medically incompetent rear end from the malpractice cases that will follow in your deadly wake.

            The DOCTOR didn’t ever say when the infection started, since competent doctors testifying at post mortems wouldn’t make the moronic assumptions YOU have, nor would they be so idiotic as to confuse their microbiology.

            Real doctors know that denying the standard of care in cases like this due to politics is a deadly thing, if only you had a hope of being one someday.

            Good luck, being this much of liar and being this ignorant of how facts work and basic medicine works guarantees that you’re going to failing your steps. One hopes you don’t take too many patients out before you’re barred from inflicting your deadly ignorance on the unsuspecting public.

          • ChrisFFs

            It’s on page 28.

            Try reading it next time. Also, the entire sequence of events is clearly delineated in the report I linked…..which you obviously didn’t bother to read.

          • Arekushieru

            You have serious reading difficulties, why am I not surprised? LB did NOT contradict her earlier assessment. ALL that she fucking said was that they KNEW that the membranes had been ruptured, at that point. You can’t see the difference, even though it’s SO simple, NOW??? She even suggested it when she said that they couldn’t insert a speculum or check to see how far she was dilated. Oops? Seems the only contradictory one, here, is YOU.

            Finally, if the amniotic sac is NOT a sterile environment, how DO you think a fetus survives, asshat?

          • Ramanusia

            Actually, she came to the hospital twice, when her concerns were dismissed. They finally did a physical exam on her and found the rupture of her membranes, only AFTER she’d been exposed to sources of infection found in hospitals did she receive tests.

            Her membranes were ruptured upon her first visit, had they not shared your level of competence, they’d have realized it during the first visit, as it was they diagnosed the rupture on the second visit on the same day, when they bothered with a physical exam. There is nothing but you well proven track record of lying your rear off to indicate anything happening on the 22nd other than her having already being diagnosed (upon admission) with rupture of the membranes.

            The facts contradict you, that’s how it’s not predating. I know the truth is terribly inconvenient for you, but there it is.

            We know it’s super-duper fun for you to change the sequence of events, and even more super-duper fun for you to lie, so that you can excuse this blatant murder. Too bad the victims of your super-duper wrongness are too busy grieving the loss of life to share you glee at their suffering.

          • ChrisFFs

            Key causal factors
            The report indicates the first key causal factor was inadequate
            assessment and monitoring. This would have allowed medical staff to
            recognise and respond to indicators that the infection was causing a
            deterioration in Savita’s condition. Additionally, staff failed to
            devise a plan of care recognising that: (1). Infection was the most
            likely cause of the patient’s miscarriage”

            —Arulkumaran, Sabaratnam; Cora McCaughan;
            Cathriona Molloy; Brian Marsh; Geraldine Keohane; James Walker; Mary
            Horgan (13 June 2013). “Investigation
            of Incident 50278 from time of patient’s self referral to hospital on
            the 21st of October 2012 to the patient’s death on the 28th of October,
            2012″ Health Service Executive.

            Page 13.

          • chynna

            There was NO reason given for the blood infection.

          • lady_black

            Yes, actually there was. The sepsis resulted from an ascending genital tract infection

          • expect_resistance

            Shame on you. You have no idea what you’re talking about.

          • Ramanusia

            Let’s be clear about this, you’re lying when you state that the INFECTION PREDATED anything. She had a rupture of the membranes AND THEN got a NOSOCOMIAL infection. The fat that they waited for days to clear out her uterus is what CAUSED the infection.

            If you’d bother to inform yourself rather than make up lies to exonerate yourself of the guilt of killing this woman and lying about it, you’d have figured out that the infection she had a DRUG RESISTANT strain. Where is one exposed to such a thing? Gee, could that be in a hospital where many drugs are used and they even have a word for the hospital acquired infections?

            The fact is that she contracted the infection while she lay in the hospital uniquely vulnerable to infection with her ruptured amniotic sac, in a pool of MDR e.coli for days. Giving her a D&C on the day she was admitted would not have exposed her to this, thus DENYING HER is what killed her.

            Only an idiot. an ignoramus or a liar would pretend that MDR strains respond to broad spectrum anything. You go back to school, clearly you know nothing at all but how to lie and expose your ignorance.

          • ChrisFFs

            “Additionally, staff failed to devise a plan of care recognising that:
            (1). Infection was the most likely cause of the patient’s miscarriage”

            Can you read? The infection CAUSED the miscarriage. That is what those dumb doctor’s think. I know, you’re smarter than them and all.

            Let me guess, you’re a nurse too.

          • cjvg

            And the infection was caused by the rupture of the membranes , of course you refused to read the court case and the coroners report

          • ChrisFFs

            How can A be caused by B. if A happened before B?

            You’re not too bright.

          • Ramanusia

            He didn’t even read the document he keeps linking, which refutes his statements. This is a trend with this particular troll. Lots of overweening arrogance, zero ability to back up a single one of the many stupid things he says.

          • Arekushieru

            What the fuck does the fact that the infection may have caused the miscarriage have to do with the FACT that by PREVENTING the infection from happening (meaning removal of ruptured membranes, IN OTHER WORDS, what amounts to an ABORTION) they would have DEFINITELY saved Savita’s from being killed BY THAT INFECTION???

          • purrtriarchy

            Cjvg proved you wrong dumbass.

          • fiona64

            And shame on you for being a lying POS. The inquest determined that an abortion would have saved Savita’s life.

            http://news.in.msn.com/international/abortion-would-have-saved-savita-halappanavar-say-experts

          • ChrisFFs

            Actual they determined that the key causal factor was the bacterial infection, which they think caused the miscarriage.

            hse . ie/eng/services/news/nimtreport50278 . pdf

            Thanks for playing.

          • expect_resistance

            You’re still sitting at the kid’s table so you’re not even playing in the game.

          • Ramanusia

            Indeed they did, and they also determined which bacterial infection it was, one found most commonly in hospitals. They don’t know what caused the miscarriage. They know that she died of an infection from a MDR bacteria found in hospitals, and that she was exposed to this for days as she lay there with her membranes exposed making her EXTREMELY vulnerable to infection.

            Thanks for playing, but you lose. Better luck next time, when the facts doing prove to be so troublesome to your point and good luck in correcting that criminal lack of medical knowledge by someone who clearly had pipe dreams of becoming a doctor that are destined to fail.

          • cjvg

            Liar, here is the official report as testified to in the court case about her death!

            http://galwayindependent.com/20130418/news/septic-shock-confirmed-as-cause-of-savita-death-S16579.html

          • lady_black

            Of course he missed the part about an ASCENDING genital tract infection, meaning that pathogens were introduced via the opening of the cervix and amniotic sac.

          • fiona64

            Sorry that you are so stupid …

            Thanks for playing.

          • ChrisFFs

            Are you calling me stupid or the doctors who wrote the HSE report stupid?

            Because I’m just agreeing with the HSE report.

            What school did you get your medical license from?

          • Ramanusia

            You dear. You haven’t read the report, the HSE report doesn’t say what you wish it did. You’re agreeing with some idiotic things you made up because you’re not smart enough to grasp the basic science here.

            What school expelled you for poor academic performance? You must have a string of them, or one pending at the very least.

            Also, schools don’t confer medical licenses, just how ignorant are you anyway?

            Go learn something, you literally know squat about medicine, or science. Start with learning to read, you seem to have great trouble with that bit.

          • fiona64

            It’s a homeschool dropout.

          • expect_resistance

            I think its been flagging my comments. Annoying.

          • fiona64

            I predict that he’ll be banned again in fairly short order.

          • fiona64

            You have been repeatedly informed of the inquest’s findings (including with links) that it was determined that an abortion would have saved Savita’s life … and that it was medical malfeasance that killed her.

            So, yes, I’m calling you stupid.

          • lady_black

            It was stated to be an ascending genital tract infection. Explain what that means, if you can. How did the genital tract become infected?

          • expect_resistance

            Really? Your posts are bullshit and you have the balls to lecture.

          • Ramanusia

            Shame on you for lying outright about why she died. She indeed died from being denied an abortion. It is criminal to deny a woman the standard of care just because one values a fetus with ZERO chance at life (a very much wanted fetus at that), and equally criminal to lie as you’re doing to excuse the callous, barbarism that allowed her die in extreme pain as she did.

            She didn’t have an abortion, and the infection did not predate anything. Stating otherwise is yet another lie you have told yourself, since there is nothing to back up this statement.

            She had an inevitable miscarriage that the monsters in that Catholic country, in that Catholic hospital missed until SHE insisted that they take a look. They diagnosed her incomplete miscarriage, and then let her sit around in a state vulnerable to infection for days. She should have been given a D&C immediately when they realized that there was NO WAY AT ALL TO SAVE THE PREGNANCY. She was begging them to end it if there was no way to save her fetus, pleading with them to end the pain, but when it’s the life of a woman, life doesn’t matter, pain doesn’t matter and basic human decency and even medical competency is sacrificed.

            if you were a decent human being, you’d not be lying your rear off and spreading falsehoods to exonerate the outright murder you’re defending to make a lame political point that you lose on facts.

            If only you were capable of shame, just continue lying to yourself, your church and your anti-women and anti-life cohorts have blood on your hands.

          • ChrisFFs

            An miscarriage is an “abortion” you idiot. I’ll let lady_black explain to you how …she’s a nurse.

          • cjvg

            This was an incomplete abortion and the hospitals refusal to provide appropriate medical care and complete the abortion is what killed here.

            People like you who defend and approve of these practices are the ones responsible for her death. You are disgusting you are a boldfaced liar who is severely complicit in murdering this woman for his own satisfaction

            You such an inconsequential, insignificant and small person that you can not feel better about yourself without attempting to appropriate the power to own women and their personal (medical) decisions, disgusting and sad, get a live and control your own

          • Arekushieru

            Yeah, so? How does that translate into Savita HAVING an abortion? You see, in order for someone to HAVE something, they need to DECIDE to do it. Savita did not DECIDE to miscarry. Oops. Reading comprehension. LEARN it.

          • ChrisFFs

            A miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion you dumb fuckhead. Learn the terminology before commenting any further.

          • expect_resistance

            And flagged! I hope you get banned again for your abusive behavior. You are a sick abusive person.

          • ChrisFFs

            Aww,,,can’t take a little foul language? That’s cute sweethart.

          • cjvg

            Yes the infection predated the abortion, the cause of the infection was the fetus! Are you constitutionally unable to follow logic and cause and effect. If she would not have been pregnant she would not have died from a dying fetus that became infected.

            From the official post mortem on Savita Halappanavar :

            “The pathologist who carried out a post mortem on Savita Halappanavar has told an inquest into her death that she died from septic shock, associated with an E.Coli infection.

            Dr Grace Callagy this morning read a report on the autopsy carried out on on the 31-year-old at 2pm on 30 October 2012 and confirmed that the cause of death was due to septic shock, in the presence of an E.Coli infection, associated with miscarraige at 17 weeks gestation and acute chorioamnionitis.”

            “Her testimony was followed by a statement from expert witness Dr Peter Kelehan, retired consultant pathologist from the National Maternity Hopital in Holles Street in Dublin, who said that histology slides had shown “classic signs” of septic abortion, adding that he had only seen five cases of the condition in over 40 years and none of these patients had died.

            He continued to explain that the acute chorioamnionitis referred to an inflammation of the lining of the foetal sac, commonly associated with miscarraige in the second trimester, but added that the level of infection observed in Savita’s post mortem was “exceedingly rare”. Dr Kelehan said that these inflammatory cells would have grown rapidly once the placenta had died and, because of this, it is important to remove the dead tissues quickly in order to stop the spread of infection. He said that acute chorioamnionitis was an “alarming situation” that required “immediate attention”.

            But I guess you are more off an expert then these doctors!

          • chynna

            Sorry, IF they had treated her properly she would have aborted and the doctors refused to do that due to the Irish law. They delayed medical intervention and that is why she died.

      • expect_resistance

        Like you didn’t know that..derp derp

      • Ramanusia

        An infection that had the time to develop because she was denied the standard treatment for an inevitable miscarriage. Her situation, a breach of the amniotic sac is equivalent to an open head wound, i.e. a source for easy and deadly infection, particularly with the kind of drug resistant bacteria that lurks in hospitals. They let this woman stew in that vulnerable state for nearly a week, in excruciating pain, because of a pregnancy that would never, ever, ever survive.

        She was indeed denied basic medical care because the dying fetus inside of her had a heartbeat. FYI.

        • ChrisFFs

          She came in on the 21st with a bacterial infection.

          Ruptured membranes and began course of PO meds ion the 22nd.

          Went septic and was induced on the 24th and given IV meds.

          She died on the 28th.

          It was 1 day w/o ABX, not “nearly a week.” Granted, she should have been started on IV abx immediately, but they missed that. And their missing it had nothing to do with her not being induced on day 1.

          • Shan

            “she should have been started on IV abx immediately, but they missed that”

            Why did they miss that?

          • cjvg

            Supplying antibiotics while keeping in place the source of the raging infections is not best medical care. The fetus was the source of the infection and it had direct access to her blood supply of course she went septic, there was no question if only when!
            Severe medical malpractice by treating her with religious edicts instead of medical edicts!
            You are dishonest and by deliberately and will fully defending medical malpractice you and those like you are the murderers of actual lives. Just because those lives are women that does not mean they are less then potentials and in this case not even an potential

          • Arekushieru

            First off, 22 – 24th is TWO days, not one.

            Second, she was DIAGNOSED with ruptured membranes.on the 22nd.

            THIRD, she had already come in BEFORE that with a severely effaced cervix. Gee, I wonder WHAT could have caused THAT????

          • ChrisFFs

            ONE day for PO abx.

            The prior visit was 4 hours prior the same day.

            My chronology is correct. Read the report.

          • lady_black

            What the fuck difference does it make if her two visits are on the same day? They are still two separate visits, and the fact that she needed to return after four hours makes it look EVEN WORSE for the hospital. You don’t really get how these things work, do you? When a pregnant woman presents with obvious symptoms of pre-term labor (lower back pain radiating to the front) you don’t give her Tylenol for the pain and send her home without a much more thorough examination and risk assessment, with appropriate treatment. There was an almost identical case (in the sense of how the patient presented in the ER, and the “treatment” she was rendered) here in the USA, in Michigan recently. It was at (I’m really SHOCKED) a Catholic hospital. The difference here is that we don’t have a law that ties the doctor’s hands, just hospital policy. Someone from the hospital staff ran out after her and told her to seek care at another hospital immediately, and that if she didn’t terminate her pregnancy, she was putting her life at risk. The doctors at the hospital weren’t permitted to tell her that, nor were they allowed to help her in any meaningful way. They just told her she was losing the pregnancy, there was nothing they could do for her, gave her Tylenol and showed her into the street. She is suing the hospital, and I hope like hell she wins. Imagine for a moment that NO ONE was allowed to help her, like poor Savita. Because a dying fetus still has a heartbeat. Yes it CAN happen here.

          • Laurie Bertram Roberts

            That is what happened to me during my miscarriage I went home started to hemorrhage and almost died. http://theintelligentstatisticspeaks.blogspot.com/2011/11/in-recesses-of-my-mind-there-areso-many.html

          • purrtriarchy

            You’re wrong.

          • ChrisFFs

            It’s too bad you can’t be more specific.

          • Arekushieru

            What need is there for purr to reiterate everything else that anybody has ALREADY told you, asshat?

          • Ramanusia

            She wasn’t diagnosed with a bacterial infection on the 21st, she came in with a complaint of “unbearable” lower back pain. No exam done on the 21st indicated any sort of infection. This is a lie you keep repeating based on a report that was prepared without the coroners report and based on documentation that been altered AFTER the incident, and which never states what you’re claiming it does.

            She was admitted with an inevitable miscarriage on the 21st, with bulging membranes and no cloudiness on speculum.

            Sweetie, admit was 21st and death was the 28, that’s nearly a week to those who can count and are capable telling the truth (though I see why you’re having such issues.)

            Granted she should have been EVACUATED immediately. What purpose is there in pumping antibiotics into a woman with no signs of infection and a definite diagnosis of an inevitable miscarriage?

            They missed it, they admitted her, and were waiting for a heartbeat to stop while she GOT the ascending genital tract infection and developed sepsis, all of which happened because they failed to induce her when the inevitable miscarriage was first diagnosed on DAY 1. The interviews made it clear that the only reason they waited WAS the heartbeat.

            Try reading what’s there for comprehension instead of making up things and lying to support your political ideology.

            The medicine is clear on this ethical violation, this woman died due to failure to act, not a failure to diagnose a non-existent infection that there is no proof of. A diagnosis of chorioamnitis AFTER a death due to sepsis doesn’t say that what the inevitable miscarriage was due to, and the report makes it clear that the team reviewing the suspect medical records was surmising only.

            Do stop lying, it’s clear you didn’t read the report, or that you couldn’t understand it, but you’re deeply dedicated to lying about the sequence of events even when you cite a source that proves that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

            You keep losing and losing badly. Why persist when everything proves you to be untruthful or extremely ignorant?

  • L-dan

    North Dakotan’s tax dollars at work, appealing a law that will almost certainly be found unconstitutional at every level of appeal.

    How many public services are being cut to fund such appeals, I wonder?

    • expect_resistance

      The antis will not admit how much public money is being wasted on the appeal process. If you ask them they will justify it with some bullshit response about “saving babies.”

      • Ramanusia

        Why do we need to ask them these questions, surely some enterprising journalist could do the research and put some numbers together without asking known liars?

  • Nemain Ravenswoods

    I live next door to North Dakota. The men there have an attitude that women are born to serve. And the women connected to them have been brainwashed into believing that if you have balls hanging between your legs then you are always right and if you don’t believe that then what you need is a few hard knocks to get your facts straight. My sister was married to one of them and she finally left the abusive bastard.

  • Suba gunawardana

    All the anti-choice activist women should be sent to live in North Dakota for 10 years.

    • BJ Survivor

      Better yet, they should be evacuated to Catholic “pro-life” hell-holes like the Philippines and El Salvador, etc.