logo
Texas hospital that discharged woman with doomed pregnancy violated the law, a federal inquiry finds

Texas hospital that discharged woman with doomed pregnancy violated the law, a federal inquiry finds

CNN05-06-2025
A Texas hospital that repeatedly sent a woman who was bleeding and in pain home without ending her nonviable, life-threatening pregnancy violated the law, according to a newly released federal investigation.
The government's findings, which have not been previously reported, were a small victory for 36-year-old Kyleigh Thurman, who ultimately lost part of her reproductive system after being discharged without any help from her hometown emergency room for her dangerous ectopic pregnancy.
But a new policy the Trump administration announced on Tuesday has thrown into doubt the federal government's oversight of hospitals that deny women emergency abortions, even when they are at risk for serious infection, organ loss or severe hemorrhaging.
Thurman had hoped the federal government's investigation, which issued a report in April after concluding its inquiry last year, would send a clear message that ectopic pregnancies must be treated by hospitals in Texas, which has one of the nation's strictest abortion bans.
'I didn't want anyone else to have to go through this,' Thurman said in an interview with the Associated Press from her Texas home this week. 'I put a lot of the responsibility on the state of Texas and policy makers and the legislators that set this chain of events off.'
Women around the country have been denied emergency abortions for their life-threatening pregnancies after states swiftly enacted abortion restrictions in response to a 2022 ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, which includes three appointees of President Donald Trump.
The guidance issued by the Biden administration in 2022 was an effort to preserve access to emergency abortions for extreme cases in which women were experiencing medical emergencies. It directed hospitals — even ones in states with severe restrictions — to provide abortions in those emergency cases. If hospitals did not comply, they would be in violation of a federal law and risk losing some federal funds.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency responsible for enforcing the law and inspecting hospitals, announced on Tuesday it would revoke the Biden-era guidance around emergency abortions. CMS administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz said in a social media post on Wednesday that the revocation of the policy would not prevent pregnant women from getting treatment in medical emergencies.
'The Biden Administration created confusion, but EMTALA is clear and the law has not changed: women will receive care for miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and medical emergencies in all fifty states—this has not and will never change in the Trump Administration,' Oz wrote, using the acronyms for the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act.
The law, which remains intact and requires doctors to provide stabilizing treatment, was one of the few ways that Thurman was able to hold the emergency room accountable after she didn't receive any help from staff at Ascension Seton Williamson in Round Rock, Texas in February of 2023, a few months after Texas enacted its strict abortion ban.
Emergency room staff observed that Thurman's hormone levels had dropped, a pregnancy was not visible in her uterus and a structure was blocking her fallopian tube — all telltale signs of an ectopic pregnancy, when a fetus implants outside of the uterus and has no room to grow. If left untreated, ectopic pregnancies can rupture, causing organ damage, hemorrhage or even death.
Thurman, however, was sent home and given a pamphlet on miscarriage for her first pregnancy. She returned three days later, still bleeding, and was given an injected drug intended to end the pregnancy, but it was too late. Days later, she showed up again at the emergency room, bleeding out because the fertilized egg growing on Thurman's fallopian tube ruptured it. She underwent an emergency surgery that removed part of her reproductive system.
CMS launched its investigation of how Ascension Seton Williamson handled Thurman's case late last year, shortly after she filed a complaint. Investigators concluded the hospital failed to give her a proper medical screening exam, including an evaluation with an OB-GYN. The hospital violated the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which requires emergency rooms to provide stabilizing treatment to all patients. Thurman was 'at risk for deterioration of her health and wellbeing as a result of an untreated medical condition,' the investigation said in its report, which was publicly released last month.
Ascension, a vast hospital system that has facilities across multiple states, did not respond to questions about Thurman's case, saying only that it is 'is committed to providing high-quality care to all who seek our services.'
Doctors and legal experts have warned abortion restrictions like the one Texas enacted have discouraged emergency room staff from aborting dangerous and nonviable pregnancies, even when a woman's life is imperiled. The stakes are especially high in Texas, where doctors face up to 99 years in prison if convicted of performing an illegal abortion. Lawmakers in the state are weighing a law that would remove criminal penalties for doctors who provide abortions in certain medical emergencies.
'We see patients with miscarriages being denied care, bleeding out in parking lots. We see patients with nonviable pregnancies being told to continue those to term,' said Molly Duane, an attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights that represented Thurman. 'This is not, maybe, what some people thought abortion bans would look like, but this is the reality.'
The Biden administration routinely warned hospitals that they need to provide abortions when a woman's health was in jeopardy, even suing Idaho over its state law that initially prohibited nearly all abortions, unless a woman's life was on the line.
But CMS' announcement on Tuesday raises questions about whether such investigations will continue if hospitals do not provide abortions for women in medical emergencies.
The agency said it will still enforce the law, 'including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy.'
While states like Texas have clarified that ectopic pregnancies can legally be treated with abortions, the laws do not provide for every complication that might arise during a pregnancy. Several women in Texas have sued the state for its law, which has prevented women from terminating pregnancies in cases where their fetuses had deadly fetal anomalies or they went into labor too early for the fetus to survive.
Thurman worries pregnant patients with serious complications still won't be able to get the help they may need in Texas emergency rooms.
'You cannot predict the ways a pregnancy can go,' Thurman said. 'It can happen to anyone, still. There's still so many ways in which pregnancies that aren't ectopic can be deadly.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is Donald Trump Named in the Epstein Files?
Is Donald Trump Named in the Epstein Files?

Time​ Magazine

time12 hours ago

  • Time​ Magazine

Is Donald Trump Named in the Epstein Files?

The Trump Administration has tried—and failed—to put tensions over its handling of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's case to bed for weeks. But they've only continued to escalate as news outlets have reported new information related to President Donald Trump's years-long relationship with Epstein and potential inclusion in files related to the case. The recent controversy ignited after the Department of Justice and FBI issued a memo earlier this month declaring Epstein's death a suicide and denying the existence of a 'client list' of people involved in his alleged sex trafficking activities. The memo contradicted a slew of conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein that have been particularly prominent on the right and had previously been fueled by top Trump Administration officials including FBI Director Kash Patel and U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who in February stated that the rumored 'client list' was 'sitting on my desk right now.' (Following the memo's release, both have walked back their previous comments: Patel stated that 'the conspiracy theories just aren't true, never have been,' and Bondi said that she was referring to the case file on Epstein in the February interview.) Trump himself brought the issue up more rarely than his allies, though he promised on the campaign trail to release more information related to the case. The Administration's reversal on the matter has drawn outcry from the President's MAGA base and divided the Republican Party, as constituent concerns and calls for transparency have clashed with Trump's repeated attempts to downplay the scandal. House Speaker Mike Johnson earlier this week prevented a vote on a bipartisan bill that would mandate the full release of the Epstein files—cosponsored by fellow Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna—by sending lawmakers home early for their five-week recess. A day later, the House Oversight Committee voted late Wednesday to subpoena the Department of Justice for its files related to Epstein's case. 'The American people deserve transparency and accountability and his victims deserve justice,' Rep. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, the top-ranking Democrat on the panel, wrote on X Wednesday. 'The wealthy and powerful are not above the law.' Three Republicans on the committee broke with their party to vote with Democrats on the matter. The committee also issued a subpoena for a deposition from Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's long-time associate who is currently serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking and other crimes. Here's what to know about the controversy and how the Administration is responding. White House hits back at reports that Trump is named in the files Questions about the Administration's handling of documents related to Epstein further mounted after the Wall Street Journal and other news outlets reported on Wednesday that Justice Department officials informed the President in May that his name is in the Epstein files. His inclusion in the records, which also include the names of other influential figures, isn't evidence of wrongdoing, according to the Journal's report. Trump's name has previously appeared in unsealed documents in the case, along with those of a number of other Epstein acquaintances and associates. Justice Department officials also reportedly informed Trump in the May briefing that they did not plan on releasing additional files related to Epstein because the material included child pornography and the personal information of victims. The Administration is pushing back on the reporting. White House communications director Steven Cheung referred to it as 'fake news' in a statement to TIME. 'The fact is that the President kicked him out of his club for being a creep,' Cheung said. However, a Trump official told Reuters that the Administration is not denying that Trump's name was mentioned in the files. The Journal's most recent report comes as its parent companies, owner, two reporters, and one of the parent company's CEOs face a libel lawsuit filed by the President in response to an earlier story alleging that Trump was one of dozens of individuals who wrote letters to Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003. 'Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,' the letter concluded, according to the media outlet. TIME has not independently verified the reporting. On Wednesday, Rep. Khanna told MSNBC's 'The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell' that he planned on issuing a subpoena for the birthday album, which is in the possession of the Epstein estate. In the face of the escalating scandal, the Trump Administration has made some effort to release more files related to Epstein. On July 18, the Justice Department filed a motion asking for grand jury transcripts in the case to be released. A Florida federal judge this Wednesday blocked one of the Administration's requests to unseal grand jury testimony, citing regulations barring courts from unsealing such transcripts except in narrow circumstances. Two other requests for information filed by the Department in the state of New York are still being considered. What has Trump said about Epstein? Despite Trump's attempts to distance himself from Epstein since the disgraced financier's first conviction in 2008, the two were previously pictured together on numerous occasions—including at Trump's 1993 wedding to Marla Maples and at his Mar-a-Lago estate. In a 2002 interview with New York Magazine, Trump stated that he had known Epstein for around 15 years and referred to him as a 'terrific guy' and 'a lot of fun.' 'It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life,' the magazine quoted the President as saying. In 2017, however, the Trump Organization denied that the President had a relationship with Epstein or was aware of his conduct. 'This has all been reported countless times in the press,' Trump Organization attorney Alan Garten told POLITICO. The President has expressed ire at the media's focus on Epstein in recent weeks. 'I had the Greatest Six Months of any President in the History of our Country, and all the Fake News wants to talk about is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax!' Trump wrote on Truth Social Wednesday. What files have already been released on Epstein and is there a client list? Public pressure for the unsealing of files regarding the notorious sex offender is in part due to Trump's 2024 presidential campaign promise to release more information regarding the matter. Some previously sealed documents related to the Epstein and Maxwell cases have already been made public. In January 2024, more than 1,400 pages of records were unsealed under the Biden Administration, though they included little new information. This February, the Trump Justice Department released what it referred to as the 'first phase of the declassified Epstein files,' first to a group of right-wing influencers and later publicly. The information, however, was mostly already public, including flight logs and a redacted copy of Epstein's contact book. Trump is among other prominent figures named in the previously unsealed documents. He was mentioned in a 2016 deposition from Johanna Sjoberg, one of Epstein's victims, who said the disgraced financier's plane made an impromptu stop in Atlantic City in the 2000s. Sjoberg said 'no' when asked if she'd given Trump a massage. The FBI and DOJ have denied the existence of a 'client list' of people Epstein allegedly trafficked young girls to. They also said there is no credible evidence that Epstein blackmailed associates to keep them quiet. Why is the government meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell now? Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said on Tuesday that he intended to meet with Maxwell to discuss Epstein and what she knows about his actions. Blanche said he reached out at Bondi's request. 'President Trump has told us to release all credible evidence,' he said. 'If Ghislane Maxwell has information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims, the FBI and the DOJ will hear what she has to say.' Maxwell's lawyer confirmed in a post on X that they were in contact with the government. The decision to speak with Maxwell, as well as the Department of Justice's request for grand jury testimony related to the Epstein to be unsealed on Friday, mark a shift in Bondi's approach to the issue as the Administration continues to take fire from its base and some Republican lawmakers and media figures.

Judges deny releasing Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury transcripts from cases in New York and Florida
Judges deny releasing Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury transcripts from cases in New York and Florida

Yahoo

time14 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Judges deny releasing Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury transcripts from cases in New York and Florida

Federal judges in New York and Florida on Wednesday rejected requests to unseal grand jury transcripts related to investigations into Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. Last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche asked judges in Florida and New York to release transcripts from grand jury proceedings that resulted in indictments against Epstein and Maxwell, saying, 'Transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration.' However, appeals from both the Trump administration and Maxwell were denied Wednesday by two separate judges. The evidence the Trump administration hoped to unseal, however, likely wouldn't reveal much, according to experts, who say prosecutors try to provide just enough to get charges — not introduce an entire investigation. U.S. Judge Robin L. Rosenberg in West Palm Beach wrote in her ruling that the request to release the documents related to an investigation into Epstein from 2005 to 2007 did not meet any of the extraordinary exceptions under federal law that could make them public. Grand jury proceedings are typically done in secret and kept from public view. Meanwhile, New York federal Judge Paul A. Engelmayer wrote in a filing that Maxwell, who requested access to grand jury transcripts in her case, 'has not shown, or attempted to show, that the grand jury materials in her case are apt to reveal any deficiency in the proceedings leading to her indictment.' Engelmayer wrote there was 'no compelling necessity' for Maxwell to review her grand jury transcripts, which the Trump Administration has also requested to unseal. 'The Court will review these transcripts expeditiously. In the event the Court determines it would benefit from Maxwell's commentary as to discrete aspect of these transcripts, the Court stands ready to make that excerpt, or a synopsis thereof, available to her counsel to facilitate counsel's briefing,' Engelmayer wrote. Engelmayer continued: 'But there is no justification for Maxwell to obtain the extraordinary relief of plenary access to the grand jury transcripts in her case.' Both rejections come about a week after the Justice Department asked the judges to release the records, likely in a move to appease the MAGA base of President Donald Trump, many of whom believe the government has not been transparent with their investigation into Epstein. While Trump ran on the promise that more information would be released about Epstein and his associates, he has since reversed course, with Attorney General Pam Bondi releasing a joint memo with the FBI indicating there would be no more information shared about the financier's conviction. In 2008, Epstein made a deal with federal prosecutors in Florida that would let him avoid more serious federal charges and instead plead guilty to state charges of procuring a person under 18 for prostitution and solicitation of prostitution. Epstein was arrested in 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges. He later died by suicide in Manhattan federal court while awaiting trial. Maxwell was later convicted at trial and sentenced to 20 years in prison. After news of the rejection was made public Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters she would 'let the president speak to whether he wants to see an appeal.' With reporting from the Associated Press. Solve the daily Crossword

OXFORD GRAY NORTH AMERICA CORP ("OXFORD GRAY") RECENTLY FILED BREACH OF CONTRACT LAWSUIT FOR OVER $9 MILLION AGAINST AUSTIN, TEXAS-BASED COMPANY, FINTIV, ALSO KNOWN AS MOZIDO, OWNED AND LED BY MICHAEL LIBERTY ["Liberty"]
OXFORD GRAY NORTH AMERICA CORP ("OXFORD GRAY") RECENTLY FILED BREACH OF CONTRACT LAWSUIT FOR OVER $9 MILLION AGAINST AUSTIN, TEXAS-BASED COMPANY, FINTIV, ALSO KNOWN AS MOZIDO, OWNED AND LED BY MICHAEL LIBERTY ["Liberty"]

Associated Press

time15 hours ago

  • Associated Press

OXFORD GRAY NORTH AMERICA CORP ("OXFORD GRAY") RECENTLY FILED BREACH OF CONTRACT LAWSUIT FOR OVER $9 MILLION AGAINST AUSTIN, TEXAS-BASED COMPANY, FINTIV, ALSO KNOWN AS MOZIDO, OWNED AND LED BY MICHAEL LIBERTY ["Liberty"]

WASHINGTON, July 24, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Oxford Gray Corporation recently filed a lawsuit in Austin, Texas, for over $9 million for breach of contract against the Austin-based company, Fintiv (also known as 'Mozido'), which Michael Liberty led and controlled. [See HERE. Case D-1-G-N-25-004633, 6/27/2025, Travis County, Texas, 345th Travis Co. Texas] Allegations by Oxford Gray in the Austin case Fintiv, the Austin, Texas-based company, formerly known as 'Mozido,' led and controlled by Michael Liberty, borrowed a total of $5 million under a series of Promissory Notes ('Notes') evidencing loans by plaintiff Oxford Gray Corp. to Fintiv. The notes were subject to payment of principal and interest due as per the repayment schedule set forth in the Notes. Oxford Gray alleges in the recently filed Texas case that Fintiv defaulted on timely payments under the Notes and therefore is in breach of contract and owes more than $9 million in unpaid principal and interest due under the Notes. For Texas case, see HERE. In a separate case filed in October 2024 in Florida, Oxford Gray alleges that Michael Liberty signed a personal guaranty for one of the Promissory Notes at issue in the Austin case and is requiring Liberty to honor his personal guarantee of that Note. See HERE. Icarus Cap. Corp. and Oxford Gray Corp. v. Fintiv and Michael Liberty, individual, 5-21-2025, #223582, Fla. 9th Judicial Cir., Orange Co. Fla, Case No. 2024 CA 009041-O. The complaint filed in Texas begins as follows, to provide context for the case: 'This case stems from Fintiv's failure to repay a series of promissory notes entered into with Oxford Gray…as part of what the U.S. Department of Justice described as a 'scheme to defraud' investors that resulted in a 2019 criminal indictment of Liberty.' Oxford Gray attached a copy of the Liberty criminal indictment as an exhibit to, and relevant to, the Oxford Gray / Austin, Texas case. See February 27, 2019, Maine federal indictment of Michael Liberty HERE. However, Lanny J. Davis, a Washington D.C. attorney and outside legal advisor to the plaintiff in the case, Oxford Gray North America Corp., said it is only fair to point out that Mr. Liberty's 2019 indictment and a 2016 prior guilty plea for violating federal campaign finance laws were both discharged as a result of the February 2021 pardon of Mr. Liberty by President Trump. See President Trump's pardon of Mr. Liberty HERE. Davis also pointed out that the presidential pardon does not interrupt an ongoing 2018 civil enforcement case against Liberty by the US Securities and Exchange Commission ('SEC') alleging a 'scheme to defraud' -- nor block the continuation of this breach of contract case filed by Oxford Gray in Austin, Texas. See SEC complaint filed against Michael Liberty for scheme to defraud investors and other allegations HERE. Davis added: 'My client Oxford Gray hopes and believes that justice will be done and that Mr. Liberty will be required to comply with his written personal guarantee of loans made to Fintiv.' Attorney Lanny Davis is a legal advisor to the plaintiff Oxford Gray North America Corp. He is a Washington D.C. attorney, founder of the law firm Lanny J. Davis & Associates, has been a practicing attorney for more than 40 years, and also served as a White House Special Counsel to President Bill Clinton and served on a bipartisan privacy and civil liberties panel appointed by President George W. Bush. View original content: SOURCE Oxford Gray North America Corp.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store