
CV NEWS FEED // Texas Alliance for Life issued a detailed response opposing a Texas judge’s ruling this week that a woman could abort her child because the child was diagnosed with a fatal condition.
In November, Texas resident Kate Cox was 18 weeks pregnant with her third child when her doctor informed her that her unborn child likely had Trisomy 18, a condition also known as Edwards’ syndrome.
Trisomy 18 is a chromosomal condition associated with abnormalities in many parts of the body. Babies with the condition often have slow growth before birth, a low birth weight and about 10% rate of survival after birth.
Cox reached out to the Center for Reproductive Rights to request legal assistance in obtaining an abortion.
The Center for Reproductive Rights on December 5 filed a petition against the state of Texas on Kate Cox’s behalf, requesting a temporary restraining and permanent injunction on the Texas law prohibiting abortions except to save the life of the mother, so that Cox could abort her child. Cox is currently 20 weeks pregnant.
The case, Cox v. Texas, is currently in a Travis County state district court, where Democrat district Judge Maya Guerra Gamble ruled December 7 that she would grant a temporary restraining order so that Cox could get an abortion.
“It is heartbreaking to hear of any family facing a tragic diagnosis for their unborn child. At the same time, Texas Alliance for Life does not support taking the life of an unborn child because of a life-limiting or fatal diagnosis,” said Texas Alliance for Life’s Communications Director Amy O’Donnell in a news release:
The Center for Reproductive Rights’ goal is for the courts to chisel away at the protections for unborn babies under the guise of ‘clarifying’ the law until elective abortion is legal up to birth.
We believe that the exception language in Texas laws is clear. Doctors can exercise reasonable medical judgment to provide abortions in those rare cases involving risk to the mother’s life. Whether a particular case qualifies for that exception is an objective medical determination the physicians involved can make.
Cox’s doctors have told Cox that “early screening and ultrasound tests suggest that her pregnancy is unlikely to end with a healthy baby,” the lawsuit reads. “Because Ms. Cox has had two prior cesarean surgeries (“C-sections”), continuing the pregnancy puts her at high risk for severe complications threatening her life and future fertility, including uterine rupture and hysterectomy.”
Cox’s doctors recommended that she undergo a dilation and evacuation (“D&E”) abortion, “given that she wants to have more children in the future,” the petition submitted by the Center for Reproductive Rights reads:
Yet because of Texas’s abortion bans, Ms. Cox’s physicians have informed her that their “hands are tied” and she will have to wait until her baby dies inside her or carry the pregnancy to term, at which point she will be forced to have a third C-section, only to watch her baby suffer until death.
Texas Alliance for Life added that this is the second attack on Texas protective abortion laws by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the first case being Zurawski v. Texas.
Zurawski is a similar case filed in November requesting permission for the represented pregnant women to obtain abortions for their children, who were diagnosed with life-threatening or terminal illnesses.
Texas Alliance for Life explained in the news release,
At issue in both cases is whether the exceptions defined in the pre-Roe law, the Texas Heartbeat Act, and the Human Life Protection Act — which allow a doctor to perform an abortion in the rare cases when a pregnancy endangers a mother’s life or poses a significant risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function, but do not allow abortions when the baby has a fatal illness — violate the Texas Constitution.
Public Policy Analyst for Texas Alliance for Life Deirdre Cooper also explained why she opposed “adding exceptions to Texas abortion laws” in a November testimony, where she shared that she had a son with Trisomy 18.
“Now that mothers and children are protected from abortion in Texas, some are suggesting that there should be exceptions made to allow mothers to abort children who have been given a fatal diagnosis. This is not compassion; this is discrimination,” Cooper said. “As a mother of a child with a fatal diagnosis, I would like to share his story and explain why I oppose adding exceptions to Texas abortion laws.”
Cooper shared that her son Bosco died from Trisomy 18 before he was born. “Carrying Bosco in my womb was the greatest honor of my life,” said Cooper:
For four months, I had the privilege of sharing his story with anyone who asked about my pregnancy. Each day, I woke up thanking God that Bosco was still alive. We had been granted one more day with him — what a blessing! It also allowed us to plan his funeral and prepare our children for his impending death.
Cooper continued, “There is nothing difficult about not killing your child, no matter his diagnosis. Losing a child is difficult, yes, but aborting that child doesn’t make it any easier. I am grateful that we did not take the advice of those who suggested we abort Bosco.”
She concluded:
There is nothing compassionate about aborting a child with a disability now to avoid his death later. I am here today in honor of my beloved son Bosco, to stand firmly against all exceptions. Bosco did not deserve to be aborted because of his diagnosis. His life was not a “choice.” It is unacceptable to discriminate against a baby because of his diagnosis.
