First Page
1589
Abstract
On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court upended decades of precedent pertaining to reproductive health when it held that abortion fell outside the purview of constitutionally protected rights. Since then, conservative states have raced to institute stringent abortion bans, with many lacking explicit exceptions for pregnant individuals enduring medical emergencies that necessitate care. Ambiguous statutory language has induced a chilling effect in the medical arena, where providers risk criminal and civil liabilities by performing requested and medically recommended abortions for emergent patients when fetal development would risk the life of the pregnant individual. Seized in the crossfire of hyperpolarized politics, cryptic laws, and medical ethics, many healthcare providers hesitate to furnish assistance to their patients, invoking risk assessments to gauge whether the patient’s condition falls within the categories of statutorily warranted care. This murky landscape is especially nuanced in an area of medicine that is commonly overlooked by lawmakers: pregnancy-associated cancer. This Note reviews the downstream effects of Dobbs on pregnant cancer patients seeking abortions while simultaneously pursuing oncological treatment plans. First, to provide a foundatinal framework, this Note traces the history of health-related exceptions in antiabortion states. The Note then turns to the modern status of reproductive health restrictions and its consequences for cancer patients. Next, the various approaches promulgated to resolve the fatal ambiguity of state abortion bans will be juxtaposed. Finally, this Note proposes a two-prong solution involving the decriminalization of abortion care under the void-for-vagueness doctrine and promulgation of standards of care that incorporates abortion into recognized cancer treatment plans. This solution aims to ameliorate Dobbsinduced paralysis and augment patients’ chances of receiving necessary care.
Recommended Citation
Kiersten Wood,
Losing Lives Despite “Lifesaving” Exceptions: Examining the Fatal Flaws of Vague Abortion Bans and the Spectrum of Medical Decisionmaking in Cancer Care,
77 Vanderbilt Law Review
1589
(2024)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol77/iss5/4