comment: >
  
  I imagine abortion ban states also have worse health care and worse education
context: "Some of you may die, but we are ok with making that sacrifice, in Jesus' name...Amen." - Republicans >
  
  Holy smokes that is baaad.
  For context, that death ratio is the same as China’s. It’s worse than Russia, Mexico, Romania, Tajikistan and ten deaths per thousand worse than Cuba or Iran. It’s double Puerto Rico and Saudi Arabia.
  sauce >
  
  So when are we going to just admit that Republicans hate women and want them to die. Republicans enact policies that make women die because they want women to die. Any person who votes republican is a sad excuse for a human and wants other humans to die. >
  
  Everyone's aware at this point - but Republicans don't have shame, so pointing this out won't make any difference. >
  
  The GOP is okay with that. Just like they want more babies but not comprehensive healthcare coverage.
  They want more people because people are data or marketing pionts to them. >
  
  
  They want more people because people are data or marketing pionts to them.
  
  Honestly, I don't think that's their motivation.
  The upper-echelons of power in the GOP don't give two fucks about abortion.  If anything, deep down they know they want access to abortions if they need them.
  The people who hold the purse-strings in the GOP use the abortion issue to force under-educated people to accept other policies that they otherwise would have no reason to support... like tax cuts for the rich and unfettered capitalism and corporate cronyism.
  They've gone about making working class white people feel like part of some exclusive club because of their shared views on this one key moral issue.  
  It's an ideological illusion to make any average working stiff who supports the GOP feel like they're in the same boat with billionaires, millionaires, war heroes, etc. >
  
  This should be at the top. It’s never been about abortion for those in control, it’s a tool just like racism and every other shitty thing they put on Fox News. You nailed it. >
  
  Yup, without their tools of abortion and bigotry, the Republican Party would have already been wiped out electorally by now. >
  
  Who said anything about misinterpretation? Not I. These people are ghouls. >
  
  That's a bot >
  
  Cruelty is the point. >
  
  The first in a long line of negative reports on this issue. Many of the short-sighted pro-lifers won’t realize, if at all, how bad of a mistake this was for another 15-25 years. Which is a shame because a lot of folks know they done fucked up on day one. >
  
  In the meantime, there will be an influx of women dying and single fathers, being left to pick up the pieces of their families. >
  
  Somewhat related but not really but your comment reminded me of how I was told about my great-grandpa's first wife died shortly after delivering a stillbirth. Apparently he went on the rebound right after that, knocking my great-grandma (who was actually his second wife) up and then ultimately marrying her and they had five children (including my maternal grandmother) together. >
  
  You’re right: 50 years ago Republican politics and Evangelical activism were different. >
  
  NPR was playing sound clips from the "pro-life" gathering in DC where people were saying "This is only the beginning!" They want a ban on abortion pills. Then probably just incarceration for talking about abortion, I suppose. Jail time for interrupting a man. >
  
  Yes. The pro-life states are already the ones with higher maternity deaths. Abortion has nothing to do with it. >
  
  No hate like Christian love >
  
  That's the "pro-life" party for you. >
  
  All because of a misinterpreted thousands of year-old book of folklore and fables. >
  
  For many pro-lifers, it is about religion, but far from all.
  Given how many atheists/agnostics there are estimated to be in the country, and how many are pro-life, there could be as many as 5.5M non-religious pro-lifers.  That's a population around the size of Minnesota or South Carolina. >
  
  And if you talk to them, it's unhappy 17 to 35 year old men, incels generally, who think women who are having sex, but not with them, are wh*res.  It's about punishment for them. >
  
  Bingo!!
  The Venn diagram between incels and pro lifers is a small circle inside a larger circle. >
  
  Are you saying that all pro-lifers are incels? Or that all incels are pro-lifers? >
  
  All incels are anti choice. >
  
  I am not. >
  
  I'm sorry, I made the mistake of choosing to read the words and not the minds of the commenters. >
  
  Jesus fuck, dude, I was just honestly trying to help. No need for you to chuck this pissy little strop. >
  
  Let those with uteruses choose what to do with them. >
  
  Bodily autonomy throughout all nine months of pregnancy. Accept nothing less. >
  
  Abortions after 6 months tends to be tragedies.  These are pregnancies that were wanted, hoped for.   They have started setting up the nursery, or receiving baby clothing.  
  Then they go to the doctor and find out that things have gone horribly wrong.  Their baby won't survive, or will have short, pain filled life.  Or the mother gets preeclampsia and will die if she stays pregnant, or any one of a large number of things that can go wrong.
  And if you know of someone who had to have a late term abortion, you tend to get very angry with the system.
  Because if it's not an immediate emergency, often their doctor abandons them - only a handful of doctors terminate late term pregnancies, and now they have to figure out to get one with a time limit looming - because different doctors have different limits on when they will preform one.  So abandoned by the doctor they trust, having to navigate a system that is hard enough when you aren't actively grieving, and not knowing who you can turn to for support and help in your family, because you can't handle losing a relationship over this, not right now.
  So yes, I am for bodily autonomy up to all nine months of pregnancy.    I think we need to trust women and their doctors and make a system that supports them. >
  
  This👆💯 >
  
  Increasing on all three lines
  Not a good look America >
  
  Yeah what's up with the 2020 jump in supportive states too? Covid resources making maternity wards under staffed? I guess I gotta read the article, brb >
  
  direct mortality from covid, mostly, from what I skimmed >
  
  So, working according to plan. Gotta get those orphan babies in the system so white people can have kids to adopt. >
  
  Let's not make the mistake of trying to assign practical logic to the motivations of the GOP when greed is the only real answer.
  The party leaders that have made the abortion issue as powerful as it is do not actually care about abortions or adoption or anything remotely related to this issue.  Full stop.  They care about abortion being a way to make working-class people vote for them, accepting and supporting policies that actively fuck themselves over.
  Adoption in the United States is not easy.  From what I understand (and I may be wrong here) it's easier to adopt a foreign child than it is an American child.  Unless, of course, you're rich.  If you're rich, it's going to be a lot easier.  Ergo, the billionaires who fund the millionaires who run and lead the Republican Party do not need adoption to be easier. >
  
  Adoption in the US in general is difficult. Adopting a kid from abroad is the one that is extremely expensive but less likely to fall through. Adopting a kid in the foster system has a high chance of falling through after they are already established in your home. >
  
  And often, the adoption is difficult by design. Especially if the people wishing to adopt are not the stereotype of a WASP nuclear family. >
  
  Even if you fit that stereotype it’s still difficult to adopt. >
  
  Yup, and incredibly expensive. >
  
  And Republican women would not have it any other way. >
  
  "Some of you will die. But, that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make!" >
  
  These people are pro-birthers not pro-lifers. If they cared about life they wouldn't put women's lives at risk. They would care about the circumstances surrounding the parents. They don't care about the sick or drug addicted babies that are going to be born. They don't even care about 8 year old rape victims.  They don't care about lives at all. The only reason the politicians are is involved is for the control they have over lives. >
  
  GOP: "Who cares, pop those kids out. Oh you both died? No problem, you would have been a drain on the system."
  ​
  Wash, Rinse, Repeat. >
  
  The GOP are just Taliban moles trying to break our democracy. >
  
  The Taliban's interpretation of Sharia law is actually more permissive than multiple red states. >
  
  Yep. And if you list out the tenets of Sharia Law without actually mentioning the specific term, Republicans will line up to vote for it. >
  
  I think this study goes to prove that putting a woman’s health care in the hands of state legislators is detrimental to both mother and child.  
  Whether your pro life or pro choice, it’s obvious the final determinations of a pregnancy have to be strictly between the patient and their doctor. This study appears to support that premise. It’s also common sense! >
  
  This is why they are forced birthers, and not 'pro-lifers.' >
  
  they kill their own wives and daughters... >
  
  No, they’ll send them to a blue state (or Kansas) for a medically safe abortion, and do their best to keep it a secret. >
  
  I agree, the politicians still have no compunctions about abortion, but the religious wackos will literally let their wives and daughters die from complications of pregnancy rather than abort a fetus. >
  
  The report linked in the article. >
  
  The cruelty is the point >
  
  Do not call these people pro life. Don’t let your representatives do it either. It’s not a pro life movement. The Bible condones abortion in the section titles numbers. We need to talk about that every chance we get. These people do not follow the Bible so they are not religious they are a political cult more akin to communism then anything resembling pro democracy. >
  
  Punishing women for being women ban is working as intended. >
  
  The conservative sexists running those states are proud of this statistic. >
  
  It’s important to note that these figures are from before. RvW was overturned. All of the factors that were originally contributing increased maternal and infant morbidity and mortality are still in place, but now there is the added factor of abortion bans making it harder for women with high risk pregnancies or who don’t have the support system to go through pregnancy safely to access a legal abortion. The numbers in this study will only go up going forward. >
  
  I didn’t argue against either of these statements. >
  
  Weird!
  Weird how every fucking thing conservatives do kills people. Great job, ass holes >
  
  Yes, but only POOR mothers, which is not only acceptable but ideal. >
  
  Childbirth has always been a dicey business. It's getting more dangerous in the United States. 
  Anyone who forces birth on others has the blood of dead women on their hands. >
  
  Gotta increase the birth rate!
  Wait what? >
  
  Senator Kevin Cramer says the fetus should be prioritized over mothers life every time with no exceptions. But he also claims to have religious rights that allow discrimination against anyone not following scripture >
  
  This is a surprise to who?
  Abortion has always been a medical procedure and there are consequences to acting like anything can be black and white >
  
  This is the kind of data you fight with. Not morality of abortion itself.
  I wish there was a sub dedicated to the data that abortion saves. >
  
  Who could have possibly seen this coming? 
  GOP: Loves jebus, hates women >
  
  “Pro life” lol >
  
  Doesn't matter to them. To them, they believe it's her punishment for having sex. They have sex as well, but believe they are exempt from their own bullshit. >
  
  Report: No one seems to care.
  They keep electing Republicans. >
  
  Republicans don’t give a sht about that. Vile people. >
  
  it's religious nonsense that creates the idea that abortion is something they have a right to influence. 
  you can read them facts, and data all day long. 
  They. do. not. care. 
  It's about the hate, and anger. That's why they lean into so hard. It gets their voters angry, and out to the polls. 
  It's about the oppression. There's no amount of reason that will change fundamentalists' minds. >
  
  "Pro life" my fat hairy hole.
  They're pro birth and that's it. And if the baby turns out to be not white, raised by atheists or grows up to be a lberal then you can forget about any help from the GOP, in fact you can expect a lifetime of the exact opposite. >
  
  What were the statistics in those states before the bans? >
  
  It shows that on the chart.  The slope gets steeper, ie the deaths increase after the ban in relation to the supportive states. >
  
  The chart is maternal mortality before Roe was overturned. >
  
  It's time to move out of red states. >
  
  That is the point.  
  Control of women. >
  
  It was never about the protection of life it’s always about controlling women and poc >
  
  Is this a great country or what? >
  
  That's fucked up, but rounding 2.4x up to "nearly 3x" is pretty lazy >
  
  The truly insidious part is how many of those women would CHOOSE death over abortion. 
  They are raised to believe that life begins at conception. The Church tells them the same thing. 
  Then it comes down to you or the baby.Well now, that's an easy choice I'd die for my kid to live. 
  Mom becomes a martyr for the birthers movement and cycle repeats. >
  
  Yeah, it’s called choice. If you’re pro-choice then you must be ok with that. It’s not insidious and it’s not an insane thought to believe that there is a human life inside of your womb. I’m fact, it’s accurate. If you’ve ever felt a 20 week old child moving in your womb then maybe you would understand. You shouldn’t be judging people willing to make that choice.  It’s a terrible position for a woman to be in, but it should be her choice regardless of the reason. We shouldn’t ask women why they want an abortion, it’s their choice. And we shouldn’t ask why they don’t want an abortion. It’s their choice.  Is it our jobs to determine which abortions are legitimate?  If you are going to defend choice then you must defend all choice. >
  
  
  You shouldn’t be judging people willing to make that choice.
  
  Wait...I shouldn't be judging people who are committing pointless suicide because their god told them they're naught but sacrificial "vessels"?
  Yeah. I'll get right on that.
  ETA: I'd love to read your statistics on...what should we call this? Suicide by Gestation? Who and where are these brave handmaids, willingly laying down their lives (and often leaving their existing children motherless, lest we forget)? 
  Oh, that's right: they're yet another myth the GOP likes to trot out, like the "nine month abortion" and Jesus' love. >
  
  You really don’t understand people, do you? You aren’t pro choice.  The whole point of body autonomy is that it’s none of anyones fucking business.  There are stupid reasons to get an abortion. There are stupid reasons to not get an abortion. We don’t get a say.    
  Before anyone asks, one stupid reason to get an abortion would be because you want a different gender baby than the one you are pregnant with. Another stupid reason would be that you don’t want to get fat or stretch marks. Plenty of stupid reasons. And it’s no one else’s business but the woman >
  
  So, you've been pregnant?  Lars?
  I'm a 54-year-old woman.  Pregnancy just about killed me. Its after-effects (it's been 30-odd years since then) are still very much with me.  I know what it's like to want a child, and to feel it growing inside me.  I know what it's like to want an abortion and to procure one.
  Doctors and patients use a variety of criteria to determine how a pregnancy should proceed.  In the midst of labor, doctors do most of the choosing when things are life-and-death. That's their job. Most of pregnancy's dangers come near the end (and usually during labor), not at some arbitrary middle point when a woman can decide, calmly and rationally, to continue a pregnancy she knows will kill her.  Were this unlikely scenario to occur, it would be akin to suicidal ideation (which is shockingly common in pregnancy) and would probably be dealt with similarly.
  In short, it's not as simple as you seem to imply. >
  
  Read the parent to my original comment. I wasn’t proposing that this happens a lot or at all, someone else did and called the women stupid for making that choice. >
  
  I did read it.  It doesn't say "would choose to continue a high-risk pregnancy". It says WOULD CHOOSE TO DIE rather than have an abortion.
  Your words:  "Yeah, it’s called choice. If you’re pro-choice then you must be ok with that."
  People aren't allowed to casually commit suicide without intervention.  And doctors don't just let women decide to die in delivery. These things don't happen.  So what "choice" are you defending here?  And who's misreading?  Because I don't think it's me. >
  
  Ok >
  
  Before I get down voted to oblivion, I'll first say that this is a horrifying statistic. That being said, I am tired of activist writers scanning a study, then writing a shit article designed to generate outrage rather than dealing with the root cause of the problem. The abortion ban is making mortality worse in those states, but they were already worse than blue states before Roe v. Wade was repealed. Also, the mortality rate is 224% that of states that allow abortion. I would accept a headline saying it's twice as high, or more than twice as high. Saying it is nearly three times as high is bullshit designed to provoke outrage. >
  
  shocked Pikachu face >
  
  REPORT:  Fathers in states with abortion bans more likely to be forced to raise children on their own >
  
  Whoda thunk >
  
  I don't know that banning abortion would be cause of maternal deaths.
  That chart shows there was a difference long before Roe was overturned; it might just be that the states more likely to ban abortions are conservative ones which have shittier health care policies in general, like refusing to expand medicaid. >
  
  
  I don't know that banning abortion would be cause of maternal deaths
  
  How could it not, though? For most post-24-week abortions, it's because the foetus is non-viable or dead. The latter case will inevitably end in sepsis, if a doctor cannot perform an abortion. >
  
  Ectopic pregnancies are a simple example. If that's considered an abortion, and it's illegal, the woman will die. >
  
  Correlation doesn't equal causation. It could be that mothers are more likely to die in childbirth simply because those states are third-world shitholes. >
  
  It’s true those states have always had higher maternal mortality, but bans directly cause those rates to increase even more. >
  
  That would make sense sure but where's the data? I mean it's only been what(?) 6 months since this all went down. I'd guess that the official statistics haven't caught up to the changes by now. >
  
  Correct, the data in the article goes up to 2021 and provides a baseline for the trend. But the growing disparity in maternal care between these states is certain to worsen those mortality rates.
  Experts expect bans to increase maternal mortality by as much as 30%, and it won’t just be restricted to red states.
  I’m currently pregnant in a very supportive blue state, but between staffing shortages and out of state demand for OBGYN care, my own prenatal care has been difficult to schedule. >
  
  It doesn't matter to those nutjobs. >
  
  I think republicans are finally reaching their goal. >
  
  The comments in this reddit are SO SPOT ON!!!  The expression "sad but true" is so appropriate.... >
  
  You get what you vote for.  I’m going to use Alabama as an example.  In 2018 (long before Roe was overturned) Alabama voters overwhelmingly passed a ballot measure (59%) on a constitutional amendment that would:
  
  make it state policy to "recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children, including the right to life" and to state that no provisions of the constitution provide a right to an abortion or require funding of abortions. >
  
  I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise. >
  
  GOP want people to die so they are fine with this >
  
  No shit, and it's going to get worse. >
  
  With Republicans it’s all about the cruelty. >
  
  That’s what they want. And, it’s getting worse. For women who have difficult pregnancies… they don’t care. Never mind she may have three other kids at home and a family who loves her. 
  Republicans are evil. >
  
  Thoughts and prayers >
  
  pro life, but we pick *repubs* >
  
  Republicans hate women. >
  
  That's the point. Control is the point >
  
  It’s not a bug — it’s a feature >
  
  No surprises here