Two more women join lawsuit to overturn Arkansas' pro-life laws

The total number of women suing Arkansas in an effort to overturn its laws protecting preborn children from abortion has grown to six, as two more women have joined the lawsuit.

Key Takeaways:

• Multiple women have sued Arkansas, claiming they were denied "medically necessary" abortions.

• The lawsuit claims Arkansas' pro-life law is "destroying not only the healthcare infrastructure of the state, but countless lives and families."

• Two more women have now joined the lawsuit, bringing the total to six, with both also claiming they were unable to undergo abortions in the state.

The Details:

Kishaya Holloway and Leitaea Lowrimore have both joined the lawsuit against Arkansas, bringing the total number of plaintiffs to seven: six women, and one doctor, Chad B. Taylor, M.D., who joined the suit "on behalf of himself and his patients."

All of the women claim they needed to have their preborn children intentionally killed by induced abortion, and were denied from doing so.

According to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, Holloway did not have a medical need for an abortion. Rather, she simply did not want to have children, and while she was able to undergo an abortion in Kansas, she complained in the lawsuit of the time and money it cost her.

“I felt like I had to go through all these loops and jump through all these hoops in order to live a life that I want for myself,” Holloway told the Arkansas Advocate, adding that she was "proud" of her decision to have an abortion.

Lowrimore, however, appears to have been a victim of medical malpractice.

After having symptoms of an ectopic pregnancy, she was stunned when an emergency room doctor tried to discharge her. When she and her husband refused to leave, he agreed to admit her, and agreed that she probably was experiencing an ectopic pregnancy. However, if she was, he said he would not treat her, scared he would be sent to prison. Given that an untreated ectopic pregnancy is life-threatening, this is negligence — and Arkansas law allows doctors to do what they need to do to save a mother's life.

Lowrimore, her husband, their daughter, and her mother-in-law decided to drive the three hours to Wichita, Kansas, where she received two shots of methotrexate, a drug commonly used to treat ectopic pregnancy. During the car ride, she said her legs began to go numb, and she was afraid that she would die.

“I always assumed that if I was ever in a medical emergency, that I’d get the help I deserved, but that wasn’t the case,” Lowrimore said in a press release. “Our bodies are ours. If I want to get an abortion or need medical help, I should be able to do that — the government shouldn’t be able to tell me otherwise.”

Abortion Doctors Share How The Most Common Abortion Procedures Take Place

Zoom In:

In many cases where women claim to have been denied so-called "medically necessary" abortions, the women were victims of medical neglect or malpractice; not denial of abortion.

Induced abortion, the intentional and targeted killing of a preborn child, is never the medical standard of care, and it is not the same thing as providing treatment with the intention to save a woman's life, even if that treatment may result in the death of the child. The intent is what separates the two.

It is true that some doctors blame their own neglect on pro-life laws. As Live Action News previously reported, in Arkansas, abortion is allowed for a medical emergency:

'Medical emergency' means a condition in which an abortion is necessary to preserve the life of a pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

The law also notes:

It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section if a licensed physician provides medical treatment to a pregnant woman which results in the accidental or unintentional injury or death to the unborn child.

Therefore, blame should be laid on physicians who are not acting properly, nor ensuring they are aware of what the law actually allows them to do. In some cases, it is true that legislative clarification is needed to ensure there is less confusion; however, that does not mean the laws should be overturned altogether, and abortion legalized.

The Bottom Line:

It is never medically necessary to intentionally kill a human being to save another.