In August 2023 Kate Cox, longtime Texas resident and mother of two, celebrated the discovery of her third pregnancy. She had always dreamed of having a large family and giving her two children many more siblings.
Two months later, Cox visited her doctor for a routine blood test and eagerly awaited the results, which would reveal any unhealthy fetal conditions but more excitingly: the sex of her fetus. Cox then received a phone call directly from her doctor, immediately signaling to Cox that bad news was impending. She was informed that her fetus was at a high risk of trisomy 18, a chromosomal condition with a very low survival rate.
Over the next five weeks Cox visited many specialists and underwent expensive testing, only for doctors to report that the longest possible life expectancy of the fetus would be one week, but it would most likely pass before birth.
On November 17, Cox was experiencing severe cramping and diarrhea, so she took a trip to the emergency room. She was sent home. On November 25, she had been experiencing cramps for two days and was leaking fluid. Concerned for her safety and the safety of her fetus, she returned to the emergency room. There they transferred her to another hospital for further testing but eventually she was sent home. On November 28, it was confirmed that her fetus did have a severe case of trisomy 18 and she was informed that some families with the same diagnosis had opted to try and carry to term while others had opted to abort. Cox, however, was only really given one option at the hospital: Carry to term. According to Texas state law, as long as her fetus had a heartbeat, she would not be able to obtain an abortion in her home state.
If the fetus’ heartbeat were to stop they could induce labor, but Cox had delivered her previous two children via cesarean surgery or “c-section,” and vaganal dilevery would put her at risk of her uterus rupturing. However, if she were to receive another c-section, whether it be early or at full term, it would significantly decrease her chances of being able to carry another child.
Cox mourned the impending loss of her fetus deeply because she knew it was inevitable that it would not survive past a couple of days of life, if even that. She also wanted what was best for the future of her family and for her future desire to have more children.
She told CBS Sunday Morning that she “didn’t want to watch [the fetus] suffer” and that “there’s nobody that loves and wants a baby girl more than I do… but there’s no outcome at the end of this where I take home a healthy baby girl… I never thought I would ever want or need an abortion, but this is a medical decision, and it’s what’s needed for my health.”
Cox had made a decision: She wanted to terminate the pregnancy and she wanted to recover in the comfort of her own home. She filed a lawsuit against the State of Texas for them to grant her permission to get an abortion, and while they were presiding the Texas Attorney General sent letters to local hospitals and physicians threatening them with legal action if they were to perform the procedure.
But medical action was imperative; Kate Cox could not wait. So, she traveled to New Mexico, far from her family and her home, to get an abortion.
After Cox had already terminated the pregnancy the court made their ruling: if she would've stayed in Texas she would have been forced to put her own safety at risk and would not have been allowed an abortion.
Dr. Ashley Jeanlus, an OB/GYN from the University of California, San Francisco, told NBC News, “We're forcing people to stay pregnant in states that are not taking care of pregnant patients. These bans are asking physicians and health care providers to watch patients until they become sicker and sicker, and then we have a debate as to when they're finally sick enough to provide that essential health care. That's not health care. That's not medicine.”
Kate Cox’s story is not an anomaly. And it is definitely not just specific to her community or the state of Texas. It is just one of the many examples of the detrimental effects of nationwide abortion bans.
New York's 17th congressional district (which includes Nyack) congressman, Mike Lawler, said while running for his position that he “do[es] not support any efforts to establish a national ban on abortion, whether it be through Congress or through the judicial system.” But on January 19, 2024, Congressman Lawer voted to pass two bills, one of which spread misinformation advising students against getting abortions, the other restricting the usage of funds diverted to pregnancy centers, and both limiting women in this district’s access to reproductive health care.
Reproductive injustice is happening, and it’s happening everywhere. This isn’t a matter of republican vs democrat; it is simply a matter of healthcare and protecting the health and lives of American women.