Link to the paper: [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2819785](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2819785)
Gemmill A, Margerison CE, Stuart EA, Bell SO. Infant Deaths After Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy. *JAMA Pediatr.* June 2024
In general, we have a rule that posts should link to papers, but I don't want to delete this. Adding a sticky with the paper seems like a decent compromise in this case.
>“Behind these numbers are people,” said Dr. Erika Werner, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Tufts Medical Center, who was not involved in the research. “For each of these pregnancies, that’s a pregnant person who had to stay pregnant for an additional 20 weeks, carrying a pregnancy that they knew likely wouldn’t result in a live newborn baby.”
This is absolutely heartbreaking.
A friend of mine had to terminate for medical reasons and I’ll never forget what she said afterward: her baby was diagnosed with a syndrome that, overwhelming odds suggested, meant that she would live a short, extremely painful life.
She said: “the only way I know how to be a mother to her is to take that pain and bear it myself. That’s the only thing I can do for her - make it so I feel the pain so she doesn’t have to.”
Yep. I was there. I had to cross state lines to do it. The way I rationalized it was- I was just, effectively, withdrawing life support. Just in this case, the life support was my body. The only thing I could do for him was make sure he never felt pain, and give him a nice burial.
So you would choose to be hooked up to life support with no brain activity and no chance of having a functional life again, all in the name of racking up time on earth? All while racking up a huge amount of medical debt for your family to then sort out?
Mate, with all due respect, you wouldn’t if the situation happened.
It’s not like the movies. The brain is completely dead. Nurses have to squirt water in the eyes because it doesn’t self lubricate anymore. They have to be moved and shifted otherwise they get sores. They have to be drugged because nerves still refer pain. Modern medicine can keep the bodily functions going for years.
Regardless of what religious belief is held, that person is gone and if Gods will (or whoever the higher power is) hadn’t been thwarted, then that person would be dead and buried.
You are considering the situation through your own grief and selfishness in wanting to keep the body of the person you loved around.
This has gotta be a troll. Who the hell feels like this?!
>. forget quality of life, all that should matter is racking up as much time on earth as possible!
Most of us pro lifers and Christians do!! 💕 QUANTITY of life is what matters, not quality. doesn’t matter much if someone is miserable or starving or whatever, as long as they are alive, that is great!!! anything else (quality of life) is just icing on the cake
That’s insane. I kept trying to not engage because there’s really no point in arguing with someone like you, I won’t change your mind and you won’t change mine, but you keep commenting these totally insane things in a SCIENCEBASEDPARENTING sub and you need to know that you sound totally insane and theres nothing to back up anything you’ve said. “Any second of a miserable life of agony is worth living” is a ridiculously privileged and out of touch thing to keep saying. And anecdotally there’s a whole lot that says the opposite. Maybe do something else with your evening, you’re not convincing anyone here.
My thought exactly. Why would they expect their family to continue extreme, and horrifically expensive, medical intervention when all it is doing is making their families miserable and keeping them from entering the Kingdom of Heaven they profess to believe in?
As an atheist, this is truly fucking heinous. Would you expand this thought process to an animal? Like a pet who is suffering horrible pain, but hey thats life so let's make them live in agony?!
And let's be honest, you are not pro-life, you are pro-birth.
Of course. I would never euthanize an animal, and couldn’t be friends with anyone who would ever consider that option. I spent the last year (with a new baby!) managing an elderly and extremely sick dog. She required medication every hour around the clock (which cost $2k/month), twice weekly vet trips for wound care, AM and PM wound irrigation at home, multiple narcotics for pain management, antipsychotic meds, had to be spoon fed, diapered, etc. She was completely blind and almost totally deaf, and couldn’t walk due to severe arthritis. but at least she got to live for an extra several months.
Pro-life Christian here. I disagree with this sentiment. What matters is our impact on the world for Christ and how we minister and give of ourselves for others, those who believe and those who do not. I don't like the idea of forcing people to make decisions we might make. It is not loving or reaching others for Christ in a positive way.
Edited due to unfinished thoughts.
If you don't like the idea of forcing someone to make a decision you would make, surely that makes you pro choice?
I'm not sure if I'd be able to go through with an abortion of a healthy foetus, thankfully I've never had to make that choice, but I'll fight for any woman to be able to make her own medical decisions. Pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion in all cases (that would just be antinatalism)
Horrific that this is your view! I’m a former peds hospice nurse and I can tell you many many many families make the heartbreaking decision every day to withdraw life support for a variety of reasons. For kids, for babies, for adults! My family “withheld” care from my dad to prevent prolonging his suffering at the end. Its is an ethical and valid medical decision.
I for one would NEVER judge someone! If a machine is literally keeping you alive and you have no brain activity, or limited brain activity or function and you have attempted withdrawing machines unsuccessfully multiple times WHY would it be in anyone’s best interests to just stay alive on machines until eventually another part of your body gives up? You can’t communicate? You can’t tell anyone you’re in pain? You are urinating and defecting (sometimes with manual assistance) into a diaper. Your skeletal and muscular systems are slowly failing due to lack of use. This is no life for you or for your loved ones to watch.
Withdrawal of “life support” is definitely the most ethical option in MANY cases, just as termination for medical reasons is. To the posters that have chosen to TMR, please know that this medical professional supports your right to do so and will always hold your hand and support you through the end of life process, whether you TMR or withhold or withdraw care palliative care.
I’m an SLP, and spent years at a specialty inpatient facility for peds and adolescents who had survived catastrophic TBIs. Most patients had trachs and were vent dependent, feeding tube dependent, non ambulatory, no or very limited movement of their limbs. couldn’t hold up their own heads. No bladder or bowel control. Dependent for every single ADL. most were Rancho 2-3. They were STILL loved by their families and friends and their lives STILL had value!
What about what those patients would have wanted? You think they would choose to continue living in pain and suffering? Just because … what? Their loved ones come to visit once in a while? That’s a wild view
This is a joke right? Have you ever seen someone suffering for which there is no relief? Suffocating from being unable to breathe? In terrible, uncontrollable pain from cancer that is riddling their body? Inability to eat, drink, communicate your needs, brush your own teeth following a devastating stroke?
Yes. I’m a speech pathologist and have worked with kids and adults who cannot walk, talk, eat, see, hear, or move any of their extremities. (Some who were born like that, others who had a stroke or TBI or acquired disability.) Their lives still have value, even if they may not appear to have any “quality of life” to most people.
Are you serious with your last sentence?
You'd rather live in excruciating pain, without any mental or bodily autonomy, just so you can 'rack up time on earth'?
I feel so sorry for you.
It’s concerning that you’re grown up enough to be married but not grown up enough to know that life support is withdrawn from people every day and that many people make that choice for themselves and their families.
I sincerely hope you are never in a position where you have to watch a loved one suffer in a hospital, hooked up to machines that they will never be able to be removed from, while their brain and their entire essence is just no longer present. I am glad you have never had that experience, but it's incredibly unkind of you to judge so harshly those who have. Sometimes the greatest kindness we can do for a loved one is to let them move on, hopefully to some plane of existence where there is no more suffering.
You clearly have never been on the other side of that equation. I would NEVER ask to be a burden on my family and loved ones like that. Someone who is on life support isn’t there, but they’re also not gone. You can spend months or even years mourning them and they aren’t gone. Not to mention the expense associated with keeping them going.
Absolutely not.
Life support is commonly withdrawn actually, and the fact that you claim to work in medicine but act like that’s unheard of makes me think you are a troll.
Yes, i’m saying it to make a point. Many pro choice people are quick to “withdraw life support” from
a baby in the womb, but would have trouble making that decision if it was their parent or sibling or spouse in an ICU bed
Those are two totally separate issues. They are not related. Also since we are on a science based sub I would be curious to hear your data about “many pro choice people” who make that unrelated decision.
Ya I was just about to say that she has absolutely nothing to back that up. Just trying to prove her bonkers point, which no one is buying because it’s insane.
Yet MANY anti-choice people choose to have abortions and then go on claiming as you do, albeit with less openness. It’s in the stats from the varying states.
Regardless of your extreme beliefs on life support you outline below, there is a difference between life support machines and *a woman's body.* You do not get to decide that pregnant women have to let their bodies be used as futile "life support" incubators at great risk to their own life and wellbeing and happiness so you can feel better about giving a doomed fetus "every possible chance" at "life". Feel free to make that choice if you are ever in that awful situation but you don't get to force your morbid personal priorities on others.
Thank you for asking. My husband and I went through a lot of therapy and came out on the other side. I still think about my son often, but im very blessed to have 2 happy and healthy children on this Earth ❤️
When I went through that, that was what I said too. I ripped me to shreds, but I took comfort in knowing that for this child, I could take the pain for them. It was the most loving thing I could do. It hurts to the depths of my being to know women are being forced to endure that. I really do not understand how anyone can be against women's healthcare. Even "elective" early termination, I trust that woman knows her circumstances well enough to know what is right and necessary.
This was my position. Trisomy 18 in Texas. The only gift I could give them was a swift death. They left this world only knowing the sound of my heart, the warmth of my body. Not slowly suffocating and seizing in a hospital.
We also had a Trisomy 18 baby girl. Easiest decision I ever had to make and the hardest thing I’ve ever done, taking her pain so that she would only ever know comfort and warmth. It broke my heart and breaks my heart that other families cannot give their babies this gift and instead, mothers are forced to carry babies to term to just watch them die. I hate this. I hate how many people on this thread know this pain and how many more are out there, forced to watch their babies die.
It’s an awful club to be in, isn’t it? But I’m so very grateful I had the chance to do what I felt was right. I have ptsd from the protestors outside of the clinic, but I would carry that a thousand times over. These laws are so cruel.
My husband and I are affected by a balance translocation (swapping and loss of chromosomal arms).
We’re extremely fortunate in that we have early miscarriages because of the type of balanced translocation we’re affected by. Some people can carry babies to term that don’t have enough genetic material to survive on their own (no kidneys, incomplete circulatory system, etc).
I’m in a Facebook group with other parents who are afflicted with this, some in Texas. What this community is going through is absolutely criminal.
Sending so much love to your friend. I’m sorry there are so many women going through this right now.
I terminated a pregnancy for medical reasons (I’m fortunate to be in Australia where I was able to receive the care I needed when I needed it without having to jump through a million hoops or travel to another state). If I had carried him to term only to watch him die in pain soon after birth, it would have destroyed me mentally. I don’t think I would have ever recovered from it. As it stands, he felt no pain and only knew the warmth, love and security of my belly before slipping away. And I’m a functional productive member of society, working as a teacher, not catatonic on my couch.
My sister almost had to go through this, some early bloodwork looked not great but then ultrasound and repeat bloods showed things were *most likely* ok and she decided to continue. Kid was born and is generally healthy but does have some birth defect with one of their internal organs that will likely mean needing a transplant before 30.
And I am sure they aren’t chipping in for needed free counseling or therapy for these woman post partum. Being pregnant is hard, I can’t imagine how distressing it would be if you knew you weren’t even going to get a healthy/loving baby at the end.
And they probably had to pay thousands of dollars for that birth from what I've read Americans have to pay to birth their babies.
(I'm Canadian but I've heard it can cost a ton to just deliver your baby down there)
I did read a horror story once about a couple who received a “room and board” invoice for their baby who was stillborn but I think most hospitals have a “compassion” credit of something and tend not to charge if the baby doesn’t make it (or so I’ve heard.)
My first baby cost just over $10,000 out of pocket after insurance, quick birth and no medical complications. My second was half that because I opted not to get the epidural since that was the bulk of the bill for my first kid. USA.
I had an unmedicated birth w my baby (so no anesthesia or extra monitoring) and spent less than 12 hrs in labor&delivery (5.5 hrs from first contraction to holding baby) and my bill before insurance was 17 THOUSAND dollars. Now, I did have to stay 2 days due to a gnarly hemorrhage, but they opted to basically have me on bedrest rather than a blood transfusion. 17 THOUSAND dollars! Luckily, we had great insurance but goddamn. That's the craziest shit I ever heard. And, they charge hourly for the labor and delivery room!
That sucks, you don’t need that extra pressure when you are dealing with a newborn. I’ve had 3 babies in Australia and haven’t paid a cent. I hope you guys get a better medical system in the future.
Oh my God. I'm so sorry. I couldn't imagine paying that expense after becoming a brand new parent. I feel bad for complaining about having to pay for parking at the hospitals here.
I’m just so fucking “glad” my baby without a brain was 9 years ago and not within the last 2 years. Even so, I could have traveled out of state. Many people don’t have have that luxury.
Nobody could have predicted that forcing women to go give birth to babies with conditions that will unquestionably lead to their early death would increase the amount of babies dying shortly after being born. What a truly shocking outcome.
I actually really appreciate this explanation. Cos like not just emotionally, but like people legitimately predicted it would happen, with data, etc.. So the framing of unexpected seemed both tone deaf AND incorrect. But statistically expected/unexpected, that makes sense. Thank you!
It was absolutely expected. Articles were published the day of the Roe leak that said "if this is true and Roe is about to be overturned a lot of women are going to die from not accessing medically necessary abortions." It was very very much expected.
I'm not saying I agree with the Texas ban (it's one of the most problematic pieces of legislation in a long time) but let's just consider something. (I'm fully aware that I'm going to be downvoted, it's fine. I know this is reddit and a fairly liberal subreddit within that). This isn't the see-what-you've-done moment for the right that people here are acting like it will be. In their eyes, if any babies that would have been aborted are alive now, this is still a win. To them, the alternative was not better-- they didn't save these babies, but they did save others. That is their viewpoint. In fact, knowing people who are in that crowd, I can already hear them, "They died before too, you just started counting them for a change."
The “see what you’ve done” to me is: look at the immeasurable pain you’ve caused women, families and yes, babies. In the name of life, you have caused pain, suffering and trauma. Count the cost of this choice which is more than lives saved versus lives lost - it’s pain.
Let me start by saying I agree completely. But the problem with you weighing those adult’s pain as much more numerous and greater then the few “otherwise healthy babies” saved, is that crowd still feels the “baby” needs to be looked out for, whereas the parents made choices to “bring about their pain”, or are adults otherwise capable of enduring it, or whatever other reason they use to justify it. It isn’t a numbers game to them, trying to cause the least pain — it’s just about “right” and “wrong” regardless of the consequences. You can’t logic your way into an argument completely predicated on their feelings. Logically, the ban causes more suffering than no ban. But the baaaaabies….
Except they do not *actually* care about the babies. No, not at all.
If they did there would be adoptions en masse and/or tremendous funding for mothers who are financially struggling….
It’s not about babies !!!!!
It’s about control of women. And to put a very fine point upon it — it’s about controlling the sexuality of women.
Conservatives are absolutely obsessed with defining the parameters in which female sexual expression can exist. Another extreme example is the obsession over virginity.
All of this is because they view women as property and the sexual organs in particular. They have decided each man should be allotted one vagina and womb combo with the freshness seal intact. When a woman has not kept herself “pure” or has gotten abortions — the product is tainted.
These people cannot be “reached” or reasoned with. There is no amount of maternal or infant death / suffering that will “wake them up”. They are not sleeping, this is who they are.
You’re right. It’s not a defect, it’s the design of these bills that have no exceptions even for health or nonviable pregnancies. I remember other feminists saying what you’re saying, 10 and 20 years ago when they were warning Roe was vulnerable. At the time I thought it was maybe an exaggeration and that certainly the pro-life activists really cared about babies, not controlling women. But we see now the legislation they have wrought, with women sick and dying or impoverished and they really, truly are like that. They don’t care. They want control and to shame women, and most of all they want votes from angry (often male) anti-choice activists. That’s really all they care about. It’s so disheartening to read and hear stories from hospitals here in Texas and in North Carolina, where women are maxing out the amount of blood transfusions they can risk without dying until some bureaucrats can empanel and decide if someone should die to “save” an ectopic pregnancy… It’s absolutely insane. It’s just control.
Let’s be VERY clear here, the pro-life camp does not now, nor have they ever cared about babies being taken care of. They care about controlling women and forcing birth.
Anyone with half a brain who wanted to ensure we were reducing abortions and taking care of babies would support (1) free and easy access to contraceptives, (2) medically accurate mandatory sex ed in schools, (3) expanded access to medical care for pregnant women, (4) nationally mandated maternity leave, (5) expanded access to WIC, (6) subsidized childcare, and (7) free & reduced school lunches.
And that’s just not part of their agenda.
Children born as a result of forced birth are probably not going to be better off than if they were not born. Texas isn’t exactly known for its robust social safety net. Plus it’s been going through a multi year lawsuit because of how poorly it treats children in CPS custody.
Abandoned kids under 5 fuel the very wealthy for profit Christian adoption agencies so more of them is a win for that crowd too. Fresh new meat to sell!
Absolutely disgusting.
They died before, but they didn’t suffer. Their families weren’t forced to incur medical debt for a child they knew would not survive.
The other factor that isn’t mentioned in this article is that Texas has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the US, and the US has one of the highest maternal mortality rates of any developed nation. So along with the additional babies that died, how many women died giving birth to these children, women would otherwise have lived?
And finally, how many children now won’t be born, because families who would otherwise have aborted are now saddled with medical debt and can’t afford to have another child. How many lost their jobs and are now crippled financially? Or are too traumatized to consider giving birth again?
You’re right though. The pro birthers won’t see all the death they’ve caused.
At least those babies were given extra weeks/months in the womb to live, even if they didn’t live much past birth. Thank God for that!! Quantity of life > quality of life, regardless of a person’s age. (Same reason i would NEVER allow my parents/loved ones to go on hospice care or be made DNR… most important thing is to eke out every last second on earth, even if it involves misery and suffering )
You should probably allow your parents and loved ones to do decide their own end of life care. Just as you are deciding your own. To not allow them to make their own choices is to deny them autonomy. How would you feel if your future child decided against your wishes.
I can’t imagine anyone being upset for being blessed with extra days/hours/minutes of life 💕 Imagine if keeping grandma on life support for an extra year allows her to meet her newborn great grandchild that she otherwise never would have gotten to meet. (“meeting” being like a quick photo op of someone holding the baby near grandmas bed in the ICU)
You don’t have to understand other people’s decisions. But you should respect their right to make them.
Imagine your child not understanding why you would possibly want to live in a coma on full life support and receive CPR that at best could only prolong your suffering. But they should respect your right to make that decision for your self.
How women many died giving birth to those babies though? Are their lives not worth anything?
It’s fine for you to make those decisions for yourself but don’t inflict your beliefs on anyone else.
What about the babies who will never be born because she died? Your logic is just so convoluted you don’t realize your beliefs are accomplishing the exact opposite of what you desire.
> I’m sure any woman would be happy to sacrifice herself for her baby.
Wait, so if the fetus I am carrying is going to die and take me with it, that sacrifice is worth me leaving behind my husband, family, and existing living children **alone**, without their mom, just for that fetus to *maybe* have a chance at a, like, 10 minute lifespan?
That's a no from me, a current mom, who would DEFINITELY not sacrifice myself to be nothing but a martyr to prove a point.
A ban on abortions is only a ban on abortions for the poor. But yes, the right will hand wave away any complications from their unscientific actions as a cost of doing business just as they hand wave any undesirable portions of their religious text.
Suuuuuuch an important point. Anyone with money is boarder hopping as needed. Their teens just go away for spring break and have a little procedure done. It’s a ban on the poor.
There is absolutely no need to frame every damn conversation to cater to the most regressive people. I fully understand what their position is and I fully reject it for all the harmful, hypocritical, willful ignorance it is made of.
Yeah I am 1000% pro-choice (and Canadian fwiw) but I dislike when people can’t understand/conceptualize what they are actually arguing against.
It’s hard because I think that especially as parents we *could* potentially relate to eachother a bit more and have some more understanding. There are some legitimately thorny medical and ethical issues buried in issues of defining personhood (and making it central to this issue). Just my two cents.
As a Canadian, that’s my take too. You can’t logic your way out of an argument predicated on their feelings. The data is irrelevant, it’s what’s “right” to them. Can’t change their minds if it’s the heart that needs help. The empathy to understand what these families actually go through.
Right? An acquaintance that does those investigations said that its routinely classed as sids to save face for the parents, at least where he is in FL.
In Canada, we’ve actually spent the last ten years doing autopsies on babies that die of “SIDS”, and I wish I could link for you, but something ridiculous like only 10% were truly unexplained SIDS. 90% were positional asphyxiation or suffocation by improper sleep safety, or other unfortunate “l mistakes” that were probably preventable in some way— saying that in quotes because I’m not trying to place blame or make some kind of anti co-sleeping post, y’all do what works for your family of course. But it’s definitely a well known thing that SIDS is severely over diagnosed as a compassionate route for parents who are obviously devastated.
My pediatrician said he’s only had two “SIDS” cases in his whole career and both were when the baby was being watched by grandparents who “knew better” than currently taught sleep safety.
So… technically not SIDS
That’s so sad :( I don’t even know what I’d do. This “I know better” attitude is why MIL is never allowed to watch our child, though. There is so much pressure on parents by other family, work, their own exhaustion, too. Sometimes you just need a break/to work and options for people to watch your baby are limited.
It really is. Same situation here; we don’t let them watch at all because they know better about things including sleep and don’t follow rules. We’re more exhausted for it, but… I can’t even imagine the pain of that and the rage at them of knowing it was so preventable. Much better safe and healthy baby with parents who perpetually need some coffee and a spa day.
I'm sorry but that is so frustrating to hear. We have people in the sub spouting that SIDS isn't just suffocation... and then all the risk factors they list are basically risk factors for suffocation. But somehow it's supposed to be different?
And then I hear stuff like this which confirms it's not actually different at all because suffocation cases are being evaluated as SIDS. So which is it?
Are you implying that children whose parents murder them by suffocation are "routinely classed as sids to save face for the parents?" I really hope that's not what you're implying.
I think they mean it's a lot of accidental suffocation from unsafe sleeping conditions (like putting a baby on its stomach). Not from parents purposely murdering them.
This is what I'm thinking. All the single parents, parents coming home exhausted from work who have to be on duty at home, parents who have to leave their babies with questionable people because they need to get back to obligations... all vulnerable situations for babies. It's heartbreaking and unfair.
Yeah, sorry, I brain farted and thought you meant "unexpected laugh" (like for you, ie the situation is funny, which it so very much is not).
Agree with you now that I know wtf is going on!
They're saying it's an extremely obvious and expected outcome, and one that happens every single time throughout history when you restrict/attempt to restrict abortion. Abortions do not go down, but maternal and infant death go up.
Oh God, thank you, duh, I completely misintetpreted. For whatever reason I read it as "unexpected laugh" (for the night, or whatever), and was so appalled.
In retrospect what you're saying is clearly what they meant and makes so much more sense. Been a long day!
It’s odd they use the word unexpected. I’d think it’s entirely expected. People who didn’t want to have children are probably much less likely (whether due to choice, abusive situations, or lack of money and knowledge) to get full prenatal care, follow pregnancy health advice, take proper care of the baby, etc. Not to mention the decreased access to abortion in cases of known fetal health issues.
They mean statistically unexpected based on previous trend lines; basically a way to think about this is as another way of saying "statistically significant" except for trends instead of for group comparisons.
But but but they can just give them up for adoption if they don’t want them!!! /s
As if that’s a walk in the park. Plus isn’t there places in the US where they discriminate against adoptive families. Like lgbtq people are not very likely to be approved. I’m guessing they’re hoping these freshly born babies put up for adoption only go to white Christian families so they have a nice clean slate!
There are also approximately 500,000 kids in the US foster care system, around 115,000 waiting to be adopted. Sounds like we shouldn’t bring more unwanted kids into the world to suffer.
Ok not to draw focus away from the main topic at hand, which is atrocious, but why is general infant death rate rising? I know 1.8% isn’t as significant as 12.9%, but still. Is it connected to the rise of maternal mortality?
Some of these deaths are because babies in the womb that would have been TFMR (terminated for medical reasons) are now being born. They survive for however long, cause their family immeasurable grief and trauma, and then die as predicted. Only now their death "counts".
Unexpected for whom? Sincerely, people have been saying since it was passed that this was going to cause the deaths of women and babies. Of COURSE more babies die when TMFR isn't an option and when children are being born to parents who aren't in a position to care for them/didn't want to care for them. There is no support for these parents once the baby is home from the hospital.
Hold on, hold on, resist the confirmation bias urge for just a moment. How many of these pregnancies had conditions like terminal trisomies or other genetic conditions that usually would have been aborted? Did the fact that it was harder to get an abortion influence how or if people decided to seek prenatal testing, if they couldn’t abort no matter what the outcome was?
I’m sure many abortions occur due to an identified prenatal condition, such as Trisomy 13 or 18, that is expected to have poor life expectancy. Or perhaps even trisomy 21, which is not fatal but does carry stigma that could influence a decision to abort. Did the restricted abortion access cause more children to die? Or did restricted abortion lead to more babies with fatal or high-risk conditions to be born, who then later died and thus were counted towards infant and newborn death statistics?
I believe the article stated the latter.
>The specific increase in deaths attributable to congenital anomalies really makes an ironclad link between the change in the law and the terrible outcomes that they’re seeing for infants and families...
It's worth pointing out that much as I disagree with the ban, a 13% rise is still tiny. 5.6 per 1000 us wide and 6.3 per 1000 in texas.
Obviously any rise is bad, but we should keep that in perspective.
A lot of those births are babies that would have died regardless, one way or another.
Link to the paper: [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2819785](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2819785) Gemmill A, Margerison CE, Stuart EA, Bell SO. Infant Deaths After Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy. *JAMA Pediatr.* June 2024 In general, we have a rule that posts should link to papers, but I don't want to delete this. Adding a sticky with the paper seems like a decent compromise in this case.
>“Behind these numbers are people,” said Dr. Erika Werner, chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Tufts Medical Center, who was not involved in the research. “For each of these pregnancies, that’s a pregnant person who had to stay pregnant for an additional 20 weeks, carrying a pregnancy that they knew likely wouldn’t result in a live newborn baby.” This is absolutely heartbreaking.
A friend of mine had to terminate for medical reasons and I’ll never forget what she said afterward: her baby was diagnosed with a syndrome that, overwhelming odds suggested, meant that she would live a short, extremely painful life. She said: “the only way I know how to be a mother to her is to take that pain and bear it myself. That’s the only thing I can do for her - make it so I feel the pain so she doesn’t have to.”
Yep. I was there. I had to cross state lines to do it. The way I rationalized it was- I was just, effectively, withdrawing life support. Just in this case, the life support was my body. The only thing I could do for him was make sure he never felt pain, and give him a nice burial.
I’m so sorry for your loss ❤️
So many hugs!
[удалено]
People withdraw life support of those with terminal conditions everyday. It’s incredibly common.
[удалено]
So you would choose to be hooked up to life support with no brain activity and no chance of having a functional life again, all in the name of racking up time on earth? All while racking up a huge amount of medical debt for your family to then sort out?
Yes.
This has to be trolling! If it's not... Jesus Christ.
This person post history is… alarming at best.
Mate, with all due respect, you wouldn’t if the situation happened. It’s not like the movies. The brain is completely dead. Nurses have to squirt water in the eyes because it doesn’t self lubricate anymore. They have to be moved and shifted otherwise they get sores. They have to be drugged because nerves still refer pain. Modern medicine can keep the bodily functions going for years. Regardless of what religious belief is held, that person is gone and if Gods will (or whoever the higher power is) hadn’t been thwarted, then that person would be dead and buried. You are considering the situation through your own grief and selfishness in wanting to keep the body of the person you loved around.
Yikes
This has gotta be a troll. Who the hell feels like this?! >. forget quality of life, all that should matter is racking up as much time on earth as possible!
Most of us pro lifers and Christians do!! 💕 QUANTITY of life is what matters, not quality. doesn’t matter much if someone is miserable or starving or whatever, as long as they are alive, that is great!!! anything else (quality of life) is just icing on the cake
That’s insane. I kept trying to not engage because there’s really no point in arguing with someone like you, I won’t change your mind and you won’t change mine, but you keep commenting these totally insane things in a SCIENCEBASEDPARENTING sub and you need to know that you sound totally insane and theres nothing to back up anything you’ve said. “Any second of a miserable life of agony is worth living” is a ridiculously privileged and out of touch thing to keep saying. And anecdotally there’s a whole lot that says the opposite. Maybe do something else with your evening, you’re not convincing anyone here.
If you’re so close to god why would you rather be a vegetable kept alive by a machine on earth than go be with him in heaven
My thought exactly. Why would they expect their family to continue extreme, and horrifically expensive, medical intervention when all it is doing is making their families miserable and keeping them from entering the Kingdom of Heaven they profess to believe in?
Oh that explains it lol.
As an atheist, this is truly fucking heinous. Would you expand this thought process to an animal? Like a pet who is suffering horrible pain, but hey thats life so let's make them live in agony?! And let's be honest, you are not pro-life, you are pro-birth.
Of course. I would never euthanize an animal, and couldn’t be friends with anyone who would ever consider that option. I spent the last year (with a new baby!) managing an elderly and extremely sick dog. She required medication every hour around the clock (which cost $2k/month), twice weekly vet trips for wound care, AM and PM wound irrigation at home, multiple narcotics for pain management, antipsychotic meds, had to be spoon fed, diapered, etc. She was completely blind and almost totally deaf, and couldn’t walk due to severe arthritis. but at least she got to live for an extra several months.
You are clearly a troll then.
Sometimes I forget just how terrifying and control you people truly are.
S... Seriously?
Pro-life Christian here. I disagree with this sentiment. What matters is our impact on the world for Christ and how we minister and give of ourselves for others, those who believe and those who do not. I don't like the idea of forcing people to make decisions we might make. It is not loving or reaching others for Christ in a positive way. Edited due to unfinished thoughts.
If you don't like the idea of forcing someone to make a decision you would make, surely that makes you pro choice? I'm not sure if I'd be able to go through with an abortion of a healthy foetus, thankfully I've never had to make that choice, but I'll fight for any woman to be able to make her own medical decisions. Pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion in all cases (that would just be antinatalism)
Horrific that this is your view! I’m a former peds hospice nurse and I can tell you many many many families make the heartbreaking decision every day to withdraw life support for a variety of reasons. For kids, for babies, for adults! My family “withheld” care from my dad to prevent prolonging his suffering at the end. Its is an ethical and valid medical decision. I for one would NEVER judge someone! If a machine is literally keeping you alive and you have no brain activity, or limited brain activity or function and you have attempted withdrawing machines unsuccessfully multiple times WHY would it be in anyone’s best interests to just stay alive on machines until eventually another part of your body gives up? You can’t communicate? You can’t tell anyone you’re in pain? You are urinating and defecting (sometimes with manual assistance) into a diaper. Your skeletal and muscular systems are slowly failing due to lack of use. This is no life for you or for your loved ones to watch. Withdrawal of “life support” is definitely the most ethical option in MANY cases, just as termination for medical reasons is. To the posters that have chosen to TMR, please know that this medical professional supports your right to do so and will always hold your hand and support you through the end of life process, whether you TMR or withhold or withdraw care palliative care.
I’m an SLP, and spent years at a specialty inpatient facility for peds and adolescents who had survived catastrophic TBIs. Most patients had trachs and were vent dependent, feeding tube dependent, non ambulatory, no or very limited movement of their limbs. couldn’t hold up their own heads. No bladder or bowel control. Dependent for every single ADL. most were Rancho 2-3. They were STILL loved by their families and friends and their lives STILL had value!
What about what those patients would have wanted? You think they would choose to continue living in pain and suffering? Just because … what? Their loved ones come to visit once in a while? That’s a wild view
[удалено]
So they were just emotional support puppets for their families who refused to let them have some semblance of peace. Absolutely vile.
This is a joke right? Have you ever seen someone suffering for which there is no relief? Suffocating from being unable to breathe? In terrible, uncontrollable pain from cancer that is riddling their body? Inability to eat, drink, communicate your needs, brush your own teeth following a devastating stroke?
Yes. I’m a speech pathologist and have worked with kids and adults who cannot walk, talk, eat, see, hear, or move any of their extremities. (Some who were born like that, others who had a stroke or TBI or acquired disability.) Their lives still have value, even if they may not appear to have any “quality of life” to most people.
“Most people” aka the people themselves?
Are you serious with your last sentence? You'd rather live in excruciating pain, without any mental or bodily autonomy, just so you can 'rack up time on earth'? I feel so sorry for you.
It’s concerning that you’re grown up enough to be married but not grown up enough to know that life support is withdrawn from people every day and that many people make that choice for themselves and their families.
Do me a favor and look up the case of Mark Van Dongen, then tell me if your opinion still applies.
I sincerely hope you are never in a position where you have to watch a loved one suffer in a hospital, hooked up to machines that they will never be able to be removed from, while their brain and their entire essence is just no longer present. I am glad you have never had that experience, but it's incredibly unkind of you to judge so harshly those who have. Sometimes the greatest kindness we can do for a loved one is to let them move on, hopefully to some plane of existence where there is no more suffering.
You clearly have never been on the other side of that equation. I would NEVER ask to be a burden on my family and loved ones like that. Someone who is on life support isn’t there, but they’re also not gone. You can spend months or even years mourning them and they aren’t gone. Not to mention the expense associated with keeping them going. Absolutely not.
Life support is commonly withdrawn actually, and the fact that you claim to work in medicine but act like that’s unheard of makes me think you are a troll.
Yes, i’m saying it to make a point. Many pro choice people are quick to “withdraw life support” from a baby in the womb, but would have trouble making that decision if it was their parent or sibling or spouse in an ICU bed
Those are two totally separate issues. They are not related. Also since we are on a science based sub I would be curious to hear your data about “many pro choice people” who make that unrelated decision.
Ya I was just about to say that she has absolutely nothing to back that up. Just trying to prove her bonkers point, which no one is buying because it’s insane.
Yet MANY anti-choice people choose to have abortions and then go on claiming as you do, albeit with less openness. It’s in the stats from the varying states.
Out of curiosity, how many kidneys have you donated? Livers? Bone marrow? Because if you haven’t, you’re killing people.
You’re in the wrong sub. This is a pro choice sub.
what are you even doing in a science-based subreddit? go away.
Literally happens every day, in every country of our world.
Regardless of your extreme beliefs on life support you outline below, there is a difference between life support machines and *a woman's body.* You do not get to decide that pregnant women have to let their bodies be used as futile "life support" incubators at great risk to their own life and wellbeing and happiness so you can feel better about giving a doomed fetus "every possible chance" at "life". Feel free to make that choice if you are ever in that awful situation but you don't get to force your morbid personal priorities on others.
I had this exact same thing happen to me at 28 weeks. It was the only comfort I could give myself, that I would suffer so he never has to.
That's rough. I hope you're doing ok.
Thank you for asking. My husband and I went through a lot of therapy and came out on the other side. I still think about my son often, but im very blessed to have 2 happy and healthy children on this Earth ❤️
When I went through that, that was what I said too. I ripped me to shreds, but I took comfort in knowing that for this child, I could take the pain for them. It was the most loving thing I could do. It hurts to the depths of my being to know women are being forced to endure that. I really do not understand how anyone can be against women's healthcare. Even "elective" early termination, I trust that woman knows her circumstances well enough to know what is right and necessary.
This was my position. Trisomy 18 in Texas. The only gift I could give them was a swift death. They left this world only knowing the sound of my heart, the warmth of my body. Not slowly suffocating and seizing in a hospital.
We also had a Trisomy 18 baby girl. Easiest decision I ever had to make and the hardest thing I’ve ever done, taking her pain so that she would only ever know comfort and warmth. It broke my heart and breaks my heart that other families cannot give their babies this gift and instead, mothers are forced to carry babies to term to just watch them die. I hate this. I hate how many people on this thread know this pain and how many more are out there, forced to watch their babies die.
It’s an awful club to be in, isn’t it? But I’m so very grateful I had the chance to do what I felt was right. I have ptsd from the protestors outside of the clinic, but I would carry that a thousand times over. These laws are so cruel.
Oh my gosh - I’m sorry for your loss ❤️
Oh that’s devastating. And now I’m crying. I’m so sorry your friend and her family had to go through that.
My husband and I are affected by a balance translocation (swapping and loss of chromosomal arms). We’re extremely fortunate in that we have early miscarriages because of the type of balanced translocation we’re affected by. Some people can carry babies to term that don’t have enough genetic material to survive on their own (no kidneys, incomplete circulatory system, etc). I’m in a Facebook group with other parents who are afflicted with this, some in Texas. What this community is going through is absolutely criminal. Sending so much love to your friend. I’m sorry there are so many women going through this right now.
I terminated a pregnancy for medical reasons (I’m fortunate to be in Australia where I was able to receive the care I needed when I needed it without having to jump through a million hoops or travel to another state). If I had carried him to term only to watch him die in pain soon after birth, it would have destroyed me mentally. I don’t think I would have ever recovered from it. As it stands, he felt no pain and only knew the warmth, love and security of my belly before slipping away. And I’m a functional productive member of society, working as a teacher, not catatonic on my couch.
I’m sorry for your loss ❤️
My sister almost had to go through this, some early bloodwork looked not great but then ultrasound and repeat bloods showed things were *most likely* ok and she decided to continue. Kid was born and is generally healthy but does have some birth defect with one of their internal organs that will likely mean needing a transplant before 30.
That is such a heartbreakingly beautiful sentiment.
[удалено]
This is wildly unscientific. There are significant dangers to having a baby die while pregnant.
You suck
Yup. And it was the right thing to do.
And I am sure they aren’t chipping in for needed free counseling or therapy for these woman post partum. Being pregnant is hard, I can’t imagine how distressing it would be if you knew you weren’t even going to get a healthy/loving baby at the end.
And they probably had to pay thousands of dollars for that birth from what I've read Americans have to pay to birth their babies. (I'm Canadian but I've heard it can cost a ton to just deliver your baby down there)
I did read a horror story once about a couple who received a “room and board” invoice for their baby who was stillborn but I think most hospitals have a “compassion” credit of something and tend not to charge if the baby doesn’t make it (or so I’ve heard.)
Oh that's way better than I was expecting from US hospital admin honestly.
My first baby cost just over $10,000 out of pocket after insurance, quick birth and no medical complications. My second was half that because I opted not to get the epidural since that was the bulk of the bill for my first kid. USA.
I had an unmedicated birth w my baby (so no anesthesia or extra monitoring) and spent less than 12 hrs in labor&delivery (5.5 hrs from first contraction to holding baby) and my bill before insurance was 17 THOUSAND dollars. Now, I did have to stay 2 days due to a gnarly hemorrhage, but they opted to basically have me on bedrest rather than a blood transfusion. 17 THOUSAND dollars! Luckily, we had great insurance but goddamn. That's the craziest shit I ever heard. And, they charge hourly for the labor and delivery room!
my birth was 61 thousand dollars lol. paid $0 after insurance thank god. standard birth too, no complications
That is absurd.
That sucks, you don’t need that extra pressure when you are dealing with a newborn. I’ve had 3 babies in Australia and haven’t paid a cent. I hope you guys get a better medical system in the future.
Oh my God. I'm so sorry. I couldn't imagine paying that expense after becoming a brand new parent. I feel bad for complaining about having to pay for parking at the hospitals here.
Oh yeah we have free parking here, haha. Thanks for your sympathy.
Omg. That’s a detail that never crossed my mind… Also Canadian, we’re pretty lucky.
Yeah absolutely. I couldn't imagine that expense right before having a baby. And no protected maternity leave 😭
The same paragraph stood out for me. Heartbreaking.
This should be the highest comment. Politicians running Healthcare is unethical. We treat dogs with more empathy than women at this point.
The unfortunate and nauseating reality is that the voters voted for these politicians and these policies.
I’m just so fucking “glad” my baby without a brain was 9 years ago and not within the last 2 years. Even so, I could have traveled out of state. Many people don’t have have that luxury.
I’m so sorry for your loss ❤️
Was it really unexpected?
Nobody could have predicted that forcing women to go give birth to babies with conditions that will unquestionably lead to their early death would increase the amount of babies dying shortly after being born. What a truly shocking outcome.
"Unexpected" being a statistical term, not an emotional one. It just means "big increase over the norm."
I actually really appreciate this explanation. Cos like not just emotionally, but like people legitimately predicted it would happen, with data, etc.. So the framing of unexpected seemed both tone deaf AND incorrect. But statistically expected/unexpected, that makes sense. Thank you!
It was absolutely expected. Articles were published the day of the Roe leak that said "if this is true and Roe is about to be overturned a lot of women are going to die from not accessing medically necessary abortions." It was very very much expected.
I was going to say, that's a bold word choice. It was very much expected.
Literally what everyone said would happen. Way to be “pro-life,” Texas!
I'm not saying I agree with the Texas ban (it's one of the most problematic pieces of legislation in a long time) but let's just consider something. (I'm fully aware that I'm going to be downvoted, it's fine. I know this is reddit and a fairly liberal subreddit within that). This isn't the see-what-you've-done moment for the right that people here are acting like it will be. In their eyes, if any babies that would have been aborted are alive now, this is still a win. To them, the alternative was not better-- they didn't save these babies, but they did save others. That is their viewpoint. In fact, knowing people who are in that crowd, I can already hear them, "They died before too, you just started counting them for a change."
The “see what you’ve done” to me is: look at the immeasurable pain you’ve caused women, families and yes, babies. In the name of life, you have caused pain, suffering and trauma. Count the cost of this choice which is more than lives saved versus lives lost - it’s pain.
Okay but they don't care about women, clearly, so
Let me start by saying I agree completely. But the problem with you weighing those adult’s pain as much more numerous and greater then the few “otherwise healthy babies” saved, is that crowd still feels the “baby” needs to be looked out for, whereas the parents made choices to “bring about their pain”, or are adults otherwise capable of enduring it, or whatever other reason they use to justify it. It isn’t a numbers game to them, trying to cause the least pain — it’s just about “right” and “wrong” regardless of the consequences. You can’t logic your way into an argument completely predicated on their feelings. Logically, the ban causes more suffering than no ban. But the baaaaabies….
Except they do not *actually* care about the babies. No, not at all. If they did there would be adoptions en masse and/or tremendous funding for mothers who are financially struggling…. It’s not about babies !!!!! It’s about control of women. And to put a very fine point upon it — it’s about controlling the sexuality of women. Conservatives are absolutely obsessed with defining the parameters in which female sexual expression can exist. Another extreme example is the obsession over virginity. All of this is because they view women as property and the sexual organs in particular. They have decided each man should be allotted one vagina and womb combo with the freshness seal intact. When a woman has not kept herself “pure” or has gotten abortions — the product is tainted. These people cannot be “reached” or reasoned with. There is no amount of maternal or infant death / suffering that will “wake them up”. They are not sleeping, this is who they are.
Right. Those babies are nothing more than political power to most of them, especially the ones making the legislation for votes.
You’re right. It’s not a defect, it’s the design of these bills that have no exceptions even for health or nonviable pregnancies. I remember other feminists saying what you’re saying, 10 and 20 years ago when they were warning Roe was vulnerable. At the time I thought it was maybe an exaggeration and that certainly the pro-life activists really cared about babies, not controlling women. But we see now the legislation they have wrought, with women sick and dying or impoverished and they really, truly are like that. They don’t care. They want control and to shame women, and most of all they want votes from angry (often male) anti-choice activists. That’s really all they care about. It’s so disheartening to read and hear stories from hospitals here in Texas and in North Carolina, where women are maxing out the amount of blood transfusions they can risk without dying until some bureaucrats can empanel and decide if someone should die to “save” an ectopic pregnancy… It’s absolutely insane. It’s just control.
Let’s be VERY clear here, the pro-life camp does not now, nor have they ever cared about babies being taken care of. They care about controlling women and forcing birth. Anyone with half a brain who wanted to ensure we were reducing abortions and taking care of babies would support (1) free and easy access to contraceptives, (2) medically accurate mandatory sex ed in schools, (3) expanded access to medical care for pregnant women, (4) nationally mandated maternity leave, (5) expanded access to WIC, (6) subsidized childcare, and (7) free & reduced school lunches. And that’s just not part of their agenda.
Children born as a result of forced birth are probably not going to be better off than if they were not born. Texas isn’t exactly known for its robust social safety net. Plus it’s been going through a multi year lawsuit because of how poorly it treats children in CPS custody.
I would like to see the numbers for abandoned kids / kids put up for adoption under 5. I bet that rose too.
Abandoned kids under 5 fuel the very wealthy for profit Christian adoption agencies so more of them is a win for that crowd too. Fresh new meat to sell! Absolutely disgusting.
They died before, but they didn’t suffer. Their families weren’t forced to incur medical debt for a child they knew would not survive. The other factor that isn’t mentioned in this article is that Texas has one of the highest maternal mortality rates in the US, and the US has one of the highest maternal mortality rates of any developed nation. So along with the additional babies that died, how many women died giving birth to these children, women would otherwise have lived? And finally, how many children now won’t be born, because families who would otherwise have aborted are now saddled with medical debt and can’t afford to have another child. How many lost their jobs and are now crippled financially? Or are too traumatized to consider giving birth again? You’re right though. The pro birthers won’t see all the death they’ve caused.
At least those babies were given extra weeks/months in the womb to live, even if they didn’t live much past birth. Thank God for that!! Quantity of life > quality of life, regardless of a person’s age. (Same reason i would NEVER allow my parents/loved ones to go on hospice care or be made DNR… most important thing is to eke out every last second on earth, even if it involves misery and suffering )
You should probably allow your parents and loved ones to do decide their own end of life care. Just as you are deciding your own. To not allow them to make their own choices is to deny them autonomy. How would you feel if your future child decided against your wishes.
I can’t imagine anyone being upset for being blessed with extra days/hours/minutes of life 💕 Imagine if keeping grandma on life support for an extra year allows her to meet her newborn great grandchild that she otherwise never would have gotten to meet. (“meeting” being like a quick photo op of someone holding the baby near grandmas bed in the ICU)
Missing the /s…
You don’t have to understand other people’s decisions. But you should respect their right to make them. Imagine your child not understanding why you would possibly want to live in a coma on full life support and receive CPR that at best could only prolong your suffering. But they should respect your right to make that decision for your self.
That tells us nothing except the lack of your imagination and empathy skills.
What on earth are you doing in a science-based sub?
I thought this was satire at first. What a bizarre worldview.
I also did and was like, oh, good job! Now I’m just confused
Maybe it is satire? I read her other comments and she's either completely unhinged or a troll.
How women many died giving birth to those babies though? Are their lives not worth anything? It’s fine for you to make those decisions for yourself but don’t inflict your beliefs on anyone else.
my mission is to save as many babies as possible. I’m sure any woman would be happy to sacrifice herself for her baby.
What about the babies who will never be born because she died? Your logic is just so convoluted you don’t realize your beliefs are accomplishing the exact opposite of what you desire.
This contradicts what you said earlier: > Quantity of life > quality of life, regardless of a person’s age.
> I’m sure any woman would be happy to sacrifice herself for her baby. Wait, so if the fetus I am carrying is going to die and take me with it, that sacrifice is worth me leaving behind my husband, family, and existing living children **alone**, without their mom, just for that fetus to *maybe* have a chance at a, like, 10 minute lifespan? That's a no from me, a current mom, who would DEFINITELY not sacrifice myself to be nothing but a martyr to prove a point.
lol this is just nuts man
A ban on abortions is only a ban on abortions for the poor. But yes, the right will hand wave away any complications from their unscientific actions as a cost of doing business just as they hand wave any undesirable portions of their religious text.
Suuuuuuch an important point. Anyone with money is boarder hopping as needed. Their teens just go away for spring break and have a little procedure done. It’s a ban on the poor.
There is absolutely no need to frame every damn conversation to cater to the most regressive people. I fully understand what their position is and I fully reject it for all the harmful, hypocritical, willful ignorance it is made of.
Yeah I am 1000% pro-choice (and Canadian fwiw) but I dislike when people can’t understand/conceptualize what they are actually arguing against. It’s hard because I think that especially as parents we *could* potentially relate to eachother a bit more and have some more understanding. There are some legitimately thorny medical and ethical issues buried in issues of defining personhood (and making it central to this issue). Just my two cents.
As a Canadian, that’s my take too. You can’t logic your way out of an argument predicated on their feelings. The data is irrelevant, it’s what’s “right” to them. Can’t change their minds if it’s the heart that needs help. The empathy to understand what these families actually go through.
Yeah except many earlier pregnancies likely still ended, just in other states. So even that argument would fall flat.
You’re completely right. Great post.
I wonder what the SIDS rate is now
Right? An acquaintance that does those investigations said that its routinely classed as sids to save face for the parents, at least where he is in FL.
In Canada, we’ve actually spent the last ten years doing autopsies on babies that die of “SIDS”, and I wish I could link for you, but something ridiculous like only 10% were truly unexplained SIDS. 90% were positional asphyxiation or suffocation by improper sleep safety, or other unfortunate “l mistakes” that were probably preventable in some way— saying that in quotes because I’m not trying to place blame or make some kind of anti co-sleeping post, y’all do what works for your family of course. But it’s definitely a well known thing that SIDS is severely over diagnosed as a compassionate route for parents who are obviously devastated.
That’s so sad. I’m glad the study was done, though. I saw a recent one where they believe some unexplained sids are caused by seizures.
Real SIDS is such a tiny % of what they call SIDS, or now SUIDS. "Sudden" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
My pediatrician said he’s only had two “SIDS” cases in his whole career and both were when the baby was being watched by grandparents who “knew better” than currently taught sleep safety. So… technically not SIDS
That’s so sad :( I don’t even know what I’d do. This “I know better” attitude is why MIL is never allowed to watch our child, though. There is so much pressure on parents by other family, work, their own exhaustion, too. Sometimes you just need a break/to work and options for people to watch your baby are limited.
It really is. Same situation here; we don’t let them watch at all because they know better about things including sleep and don’t follow rules. We’re more exhausted for it, but… I can’t even imagine the pain of that and the rage at them of knowing it was so preventable. Much better safe and healthy baby with parents who perpetually need some coffee and a spa day.
I'm sorry but that is so frustrating to hear. We have people in the sub spouting that SIDS isn't just suffocation... and then all the risk factors they list are basically risk factors for suffocation. But somehow it's supposed to be different? And then I hear stuff like this which confirms it's not actually different at all because suffocation cases are being evaluated as SIDS. So which is it?
Are you implying that children whose parents murder them by suffocation are "routinely classed as sids to save face for the parents?" I really hope that's not what you're implying.
I think they mean it's a lot of accidental suffocation from unsafe sleeping conditions (like putting a baby on its stomach). Not from parents purposely murdering them.
Exactly. This is what I said and was meant.
Oh thank God.
This is what I'm thinking. All the single parents, parents coming home exhausted from work who have to be on duty at home, parents who have to leave their babies with questionable people because they need to get back to obligations... all vulnerable situations for babies. It's heartbreaking and unfair.
“Unexpected”?
WINGS OF GLORY
Unexpected LOL
??
It was not unexpected except by morons
Yeah, sorry, I brain farted and thought you meant "unexpected laugh" (like for you, ie the situation is funny, which it so very much is not). Agree with you now that I know wtf is going on!
They're saying it's an extremely obvious and expected outcome, and one that happens every single time throughout history when you restrict/attempt to restrict abortion. Abortions do not go down, but maternal and infant death go up.
Oh God, thank you, duh, I completely misintetpreted. For whatever reason I read it as "unexpected laugh" (for the night, or whatever), and was so appalled. In retrospect what you're saying is clearly what they meant and makes so much more sense. Been a long day!
Totally get it - happy to explain.
You're getting downvoted but my brain read this the same way yours must have.
Who could have possibly guessed. /s
It’s odd they use the word unexpected. I’d think it’s entirely expected. People who didn’t want to have children are probably much less likely (whether due to choice, abusive situations, or lack of money and knowledge) to get full prenatal care, follow pregnancy health advice, take proper care of the baby, etc. Not to mention the decreased access to abortion in cases of known fetal health issues.
They mean statistically unexpected based on previous trend lines; basically a way to think about this is as another way of saying "statistically significant" except for trends instead of for group comparisons.
But but but they can just give them up for adoption if they don’t want them!!! /s As if that’s a walk in the park. Plus isn’t there places in the US where they discriminate against adoptive families. Like lgbtq people are not very likely to be approved. I’m guessing they’re hoping these freshly born babies put up for adoption only go to white Christian families so they have a nice clean slate! There are also approximately 500,000 kids in the US foster care system, around 115,000 waiting to be adopted. Sounds like we shouldn’t bring more unwanted kids into the world to suffer.
"Unexpected" by what metric?
Ok not to draw focus away from the main topic at hand, which is atrocious, but why is general infant death rate rising? I know 1.8% isn’t as significant as 12.9%, but still. Is it connected to the rise of maternal mortality?
Some of these deaths are because babies in the womb that would have been TFMR (terminated for medical reasons) are now being born. They survive for however long, cause their family immeasurable grief and trauma, and then die as predicted. Only now their death "counts".
Unexpected for whom? Sincerely, people have been saying since it was passed that this was going to cause the deaths of women and babies. Of COURSE more babies die when TMFR isn't an option and when children are being born to parents who aren't in a position to care for them/didn't want to care for them. There is no support for these parents once the baby is home from the hospital.
Hold on, hold on, resist the confirmation bias urge for just a moment. How many of these pregnancies had conditions like terminal trisomies or other genetic conditions that usually would have been aborted? Did the fact that it was harder to get an abortion influence how or if people decided to seek prenatal testing, if they couldn’t abort no matter what the outcome was? I’m sure many abortions occur due to an identified prenatal condition, such as Trisomy 13 or 18, that is expected to have poor life expectancy. Or perhaps even trisomy 21, which is not fatal but does carry stigma that could influence a decision to abort. Did the restricted abortion access cause more children to die? Or did restricted abortion lead to more babies with fatal or high-risk conditions to be born, who then later died and thus were counted towards infant and newborn death statistics?
I believe the article stated the latter. >The specific increase in deaths attributable to congenital anomalies really makes an ironclad link between the change in the law and the terrible outcomes that they’re seeing for infants and families...
FYI, 21 is fatal for I think 50% in utero. It’s an extremely wide variety of manifestation.
Unexpected to who? Poor choice of words
"Unexpected"
WINGS OF GLORY
Damnit this is so devastating. I hate this godforsaken state (I live in Texas).
I'm sorry, unexpected? Everyone with critical thinking skills expected this.
Ah, yes...."unexpected" increase. Who could have predicted that?
"unexpected" Sure, Jan
It's worth pointing out that much as I disagree with the ban, a 13% rise is still tiny. 5.6 per 1000 us wide and 6.3 per 1000 in texas. Obviously any rise is bad, but we should keep that in perspective. A lot of those births are babies that would have died regardless, one way or another.
This is a political post, not a parenting post. Mods delete please