Pro-life groups react to claim of untreated ectopic pregnancies

The Center for Reproductive Rights last week asked the Health Department to investigate two Texas hospitals, alleging that doctors initially refused to treat two women’s ectopic pregnancies. CRR, which advocates for pro-abortion policies, asked the Department of Health and Human Services to investigate the hospitals for violations of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA. One of the hospitals flatly denied CRR’s and the women’s allegations. WORLD also reached out to the other for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

Following the complaints, WORLD reached out to The National Right to Life Council and Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America for context about ectopic pregnancies, the laws surrounding such situations, and the women’s allegations.

Are treatments for ectopic pregnancies like regular abortions? While unborn babies in ectopic pregnancies are still human beings, they have a 100 percent chance of dying before they’re born, Texas Right to Life spokesman John Seago said. Ectopic pregnancies are tragedies much like miscarriages, and the only life doctors can save is the mother’s, Seago said.

Pro-life states have always clarified that ectopic pregnancies qualify as situations where medical intervention is acceptable, Seago explained. Even Planned Parenthood has acknowledged that procedures for ectopic pregnancies are not normal abortions, according to Dr. Ingrid Skop. She serves as Vice President and Director of Medical Affairs at Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research wing of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America. Both Seago and Skop explained that Texas law carves out exceptions for ectopic pregnancies in its laws protecting unborn babies.

Would a doctor turn away a patient with an ectopic pregnancy? Doctors in Texas rarely refuse to treat ectopic pregnancies, Seago said. He said doctors could have received poor advice from lawyers or ethical boards, but deciding to refuse care to the women would qualify as medical malpractice in his opinion.

Why is the CRR bringing these lawsuits under EMTALA and not state law? The Center for Reproductive Rights is currently managing an EMTALA-based lawsuit in Idaho that made its way to the Supreme Court earlier this year, Seago said. The organization likely chose EMTALA as the grounds for its Texas complaint to bolster its argument that doctors are confused about the intersection of state and federal laws on abortion, Seago said. WORLD reached out to the Center for Reproductive Rights for a response to that analysis but did not receive an answer.

Dig deeper: Read Erin Hawley’s column in WORLD Opinions analyzing the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year about that EMTALA case in Idaho.