At least two women in Georgia died after they couldn't access medical cares

That's pretty self-serving and an attempt to avoid blame for their actions. It also shows them doubling down on a law that caused unncessary death, and they will continue to do so.

D&C is classified as an abortion and was outlawed in Georgia by the law that these two Republican representatives, who are also doctors, signed into law. The exception (that it's not considered an abortion) is that there must be no heartbeat. Until then, Georgia law can imprison doctors, and it has EVERYTHING to do with the law they signed. Because it was classified as an abortion, doctors were too afraid to provide the obviously necessary medical care, as there is no clear-cut definition or standard for what constitutes an emergency.

No laws or courts have yet defined what constitutes an emergency (the Texas Supreme Court also avoided doing so), leaving it to doctors' judgment. It's simple logic that doctors risk their hospitals being sued for being overly cautious rather than facing jail time.

That GA law has just recently been blocked.

https://www.atlantanewsfirst.com/2024/09/30/judge-strikes-down-georgias-abortion-ban/

ATLANTA, Ga. (Atlanta News First) - A Fulton County Superior Court judge has struck down Georgia’s ban on abortions at roughly six weeks, two years after the controversial law known as the “heartbeat bill” took effect.

Judge Robert McBurney’s ruling allows the procedure to once again be performed after a doctor detects a fetal heartbeat.​

 

The definition they have is the presence of a heartbeat. A clump of cells that is not viable can still have a 'beat.' I don’t know if this case was clear-cut (with no beat at all), but my larger point is that you can easily imagine cases where a non-viable pregnancy has a 'beat,' and doctors are overly cautious about doing what they know is medically necessary.

I edited my other post to add this part: No laws or courts have yet defined what constitutes an emergency (the Texas Supreme Court also avoided doing so), leaving it to doctors' judgment. It's simple logic that doctors risk their hospitals being sued for being overly cautious rather than facing jail time.

 

The FoxNews article mentioned that GA lawmakers are speaking out against "fearmongering." They aren't just addressing this situation; they are defending their law as a whole.

This statement is simply a lie:

“We never deny a woman an abortion because it's going to harm her in some way. She will always be protected,” McCormick, who previously served as the emergency department head during a Navy deployment in Afghanistan, said in an interview with Fox News Digital.​

This is also a mischaracterization at best. No one said there isn't an exception (in fact the ProPublica article stated the exceptions); rather, that the exception is not clear.

“You have every right to an abortion, even with that heartbeat law,” he continued. “So, let’s make that very clear right now. When they say there are no exceptions, there’s never any law in any state where there are no exceptions. That doesn’t exist. That’s simply not the way it works. The mother's life is always protected. With that said, it doesn’t mean it’s easy to get an abortion just because you have a complication or because something goes wrong.”​

This is a judgment statement. His understanding is that the baby was already in demise. The report never clearly stated whether there was a "beat" or not. If you make that judgment but there was still a "beat," you risk jail time.

“In my understanding, this baby was already in demise. There was no reason that it had anything to do with whether she could have a D&C or not. That’s actually irrelevant to the baby's life because the baby’s already gone,” McCormick said. “If the heartbeat stopped, it’s not about this law. Remember, it has nothing to do with this law at that point. It has everything to do with providing the best care for the woman.”
​

These lawmakers simply ignore the real risks to women's health. This isn't a surprise to them—they have been informed about this. Doctors have spoken out against this and similar laws. They either choose to ignore these doctors or don’t care about women's health, or both.

 

That's their belief, and the article wasn't clear if there was a "beat." This is a factual statement.

Regardless, the fact that you have to wait until there isn't a "beat" or that it is classified as an "emergency" (which isn't clearly defined) is why women will suffer, and many have already suffered from TX to GA. Death is the most extreme outcome of these laws. Most of the women impacted by these laws have been harmed but have survived.

 

I was referring to the ProPublica article, which I don’t recall ever stating there was no 'heartbeat.' The Fox article quoted the opinion of two Georgia legislators: "In my understanding, this baby was already in demise."

I think your argument is that this case isn’t relevant to the GA laws because of the Fox News article quoting those legislators. My point is that it self-serving for the lawmakers who passed these laws (I need more than their statement to accept it as a fact), and either way, the problem persists. It’s not just about instances of death; these laws have caused ongoing harm to women. Doctors are hesitant to perform medically necessary procedures due to these laws, leading to real, documented harm from Texas to Georgia.