Idaho’s largest hospital system says emergency flights for pregnant patients will be made : NPR

Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador said he would “hate to think” hospital administrators were publicizing the number of emergency flights out of the state “just to make a political statement.”

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

hide caption

caption conversion

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador said he would “hate to think” hospital administrators were publicizing the number of emergency flights out of the state “just to make a political statement.”

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Idaho’s strict abortion ban applies to emergency situations. Since the ban took effect, the state’s largest hospital system said the number of people needing flights out of Idaho for emergency abortions has increased sharply.

In 2023, Idaho’s emergency abortion ban was suspended by a federal court. St. John’s Health System Luke said they only had to send one patient out of state for an emergency abortion that year. In January, the Supreme Court lifted the temporary detention order and St. Luke’s said it had to transport six patients to neighboring states for emergency abortions in the next three months.

Dr. Jim Souza, chief physician at St. “If we calculated that annually, we would expect up to 20 patients to need out-of-state care this year alone,” Luke’s said.

Idaho law allows doctors to terminate a pregnancy only to save the mother’s life, but not to preserve her health. In 2022, a federal court said Idaho’s definition of a medical emergency may be too narrow and put that part of the law on hold. The Supreme Court lifted that hold in January while it considered the case.

Souza said earlier that emergency physicians acted as quickly as possible to protect the patient’s health and future fertility. But since January, he said, doctors have stopped wondering when to intervene.

“Is she sick enough? Does she have enough blood? Is she infected enough for me to perform this abortion and not risk going to jail and losing her license?” Souza said the doctors asked themselves during a press call before the Supreme Court hearing. “And when the guessing game gets too frustrating, we transfer the patient, at great cost, to another state where doctors are licensed to practice medicine.”

Sending patients away is a waste of hospital resources and endangers patients, he added.

“Putting someone in a whirlpool and flying them to another state creates obvious delays in care,” Souza said. “If she’s in transit and starts bleeding very rapidly, the resources you have are no longer the resources of a tertiary care center. They’re the resources of a helicopter.”

Idaho Attorney General dispute no

At a news conference following opening arguments at the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador argued that St. Luke’s is airlifting patients, “just to make a political statement.”

He said the hospital system’s talk about the number of patients flying out of state for emergency abortions is “misinformation.”

“I talked to doctors in the emergency room, the same emergency rooms they were talking about, and they told me they didn’t know what this manager was talking about,” Labrador said during the news conference. .”

In an email responding to Labrador’s comments, St. St. Luke’s stands behind their numbers and says patients are transported out of state, “to protect their health and prevent deterioration and/or loss of organ function; not to prevent death.”

“We have no way of knowing who Attorney General Raul Labrador spoke with regarding the transfer of patients out of state for pregnancy complications, but what we can do for ourselves,” the statement read. Shared information is our data.”

Labrador also criticized the U.S. Attorney fighting the Idaho law before the Supreme Court for using St. Louis numbers. Luke in his argument.

“They are trying to get people to conform to something they want to do,” he said.

Arguments against Idaho’s abortion ban

In addressing the judges, Attorney Elizabeth Prelogar said the increase in the number of transfers of pregnant patients in crisis was “unacceptable.”

“If a woman comes to the emergency room and faces a serious threat to her health but she is not yet facing death, doctors must either delay treatment and let her condition deteriorate. physically, or they’re going to fly her out of state.” so she can get the urgent care she needs,” she said.

The U.S. government argues that conflicts with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, or EMTALA, a federal regulation that requires hospitals receiving Medicare funds to stabilize patients in emergencies. grant.

Laborador disagrees.

“The reality is our laws are very clear,” he said Wednesday.

“It protects doctors, it protects women, it protects fetuses and ensures that doctors can use a subjective standard if they believe the mother’s life is in danger,” he said. to perform an abortion.

Doctors, hospitals and medical associations say the consequence of Idaho’s abortion law is that reproductive health professionals are forced to leave the state. The Idaho Safe Healthcare Alliance said a study it conducted showed the state has lost 22% of its obstetricians and gynecologists since the ban took effect.

Since Roe v. Wade repeal in 2022 allows Idaho’s new abortion law to take effect, Idaho doctors could face felony charges, up to five years in prison and loss of medical license for performing services Abortion is not subject to the law’ exception. Those cases include cases of rape, incest, and whether the mother’s life is in danger.

In July 2023, Idaho’s abortion ban was amended to exclude ectopic and molar pregnancies, which if not terminated can only lead to the death of both mother and fetus.

But some doctors say the text still contradicts their duty of care and does not take into account the wide range of serious medical complications women can face during pregnancy, including loss of fertility. reproductive capacity.

Since Idaho’s ban took effect, no doctors have been prosecuted in the state.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the summer.