ARLINGTON, Texas — Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz fought back tears when the emergency room physician delivered a terrifying diagnosis that no pregnant woman wants to hear.
The 25-year-old college senior received the alarming news that she likely had an ectopic pregnancy, a perilous condition where the embryo attaches itself outside the uterus. If left untreated, this can lead to a ruptured fallopian tube, posing a life-threatening risk.
Despite the Texas law that previously banned abortions being overturned post-Roe v. Wade, allowing doctors to address ectopic pregnancies, Norris-De La Cruz faced a distressing situation at Texas Health Arlington Memorial Hospital. The medical team there, after evaluating her, hesitated to terminate the pregnancy, suggesting a slim chance of viability. Consequently, Norris-De La Cruz and her mother were advised to return home and monitor the situation, as per the medical records scrutinized by The Washington Post.
Approximately 24 hours later, Norris-De La Cruz underwent emergency surgery at another local hospital, by which time her ectopic pregnancy had already begun to rupture. The OB/GYN who conducted the procedure emphasized that any further delay would have significantly jeopardized Norris-De La Cruz’s life.
Reflecting on her ordeal post-surgery, Norris-De La Cruz expressed her fears, stating, “I was terrified of losing my entire reproductive system if they delayed any further. I knew the risk was imminent.”
This incident sheds light on a grim reality in the aftermath of Roe: Despite medical exemptions to abortion bans, healthcare providers continue to turn away patients with critical pregnancy complications, often resulting in dire consequences. These stories underscore the complex interplay between abortion laws and medical exigencies, revealing the challenges faced by doctors and medical facilities in navigating inadequate legal safeguards for treating women with life-threatening conditions.
In the nearly two years following the repeal of Roe, numerous women have come forward with harrowing experiences of being denied medical care due to abortion restrictions, leading to detrimental effects on their health and future fertility. Several individuals across the nation, encountering pregnancy complications, have challenged their respective state abortion bans through legal channels.
The details of Norris-De La Cruz’s case came to light when her mother, seeking guidance, contacted a reproductive health clinic in Houston while a reporter was present. To corroborate Norris-De La Cruz’s narrative, The Post examined extensive medical documentation, including sonogram images, photographs, and text messages, and interviewed various individuals involved in the incident.
Upon reviewing Norris-De La Cruz’s medical records, four OB/GYNs, with her consent, opined that she should have been promptly offered emergency surgery. They speculated that Texas’s abortion prohibition might have influenced the medical advice provided to her.
Dr. Clayton Alfonso, an OB/GYN at Duke University, remarked, “The diagnosis should have been straightforward. It is puzzling why she was turned away unless there were concerns about potential implications of the surgery being misconstrued as an abortion.”
Responding to inquiries, Kimberly Walton, the director of media relations for Texas Health, emphasized the institution’s commitment to delivering safe, high-quality care tailored to each patient’s clinical status. However, she refrained from addressing whether the treatment delay was linked to the abortion law. The doctors who discharged Norris-De La Cruz did not respond to requests for comments.
State Senator Bryan Hughes, a Republican instrumental in Texas’s anti-abortion legislative efforts, expressed surprise and dismay upon learning about Norris-De La Cruz’s case. He underscored that Texas law unequivocally permits the treatment of ectopic pregnancies, aiming to prevent scenarios like the one experienced by Norris-De La Cruz.
Despite the enactment of legislation allowing the management of ectopic pregnancies, many healthcare providers view these laws as insufficient in the intricate post-Roe landscape. Diagnosing ectopic pregnancies accurately, especially those in the fallopian tube, which are nonviable, can pose challenges on ultrasound scans, leading to hesitancy in terminating potentially viable pregnancies due to legal concerns.
Norris-De La Cruz’s mother, Stephanie Lloyd, raised concerns about the abortion law’s impact on her daughter’s care, prompting a confrontation with the medical team. The uncertainty surrounding the situation left Lloyd questioning the motives behind the treatment decisions.
As Norris-De La Cruz grappled with the traumatic experience, her friend Monica Perez played a crucial role in facilitating her access to appropriate care. Perez’s OB/GYN, Dr. Jeffery Morgan, promptly identified the ectopic pregnancy upon reviewing the ultrasound scans, recommending urgent surgical intervention.
Following the surgery at Medical City hospital, Norris-De La Cruz underwent the removal of the ectopic pregnancy, albeit at the cost of losing a significant portion of her right fallopian tube, potentially affecting her future fertility. Despite the inevitable outcome, most consulting OB/GYNs believed that even if treated promptly at Arlington Memorial, Norris-De La Cruz would have likely faced a similar prognosis.
Dr. Morgan reiterated that he never hesitated to provide necessary treatment due to the abortion ban, emphasizing that Texas laws unequivocally permit the management of ectopic pregnancies. He expressed bewilderment at the denial of care experienced by Norris-De La Cruz, highlighting the clarity of the regulations regarding such critical medical conditions.
In the aftermath of the surgery, Norris-De La Cruz and her mother contemplated the implications of Texas’s abortion law on her healthcare journey, acknowledging the potential role it played in the delayed treatment. Their experience underscores the profound impact of abortion restrictions on access to essential medical interventions, prompting a reevaluation of their perspectives on reproductive rights and healthcare regulations.