In Texas, an 18-year-old pregnant woman named Nevaeh candace fails death after repeated attempts to secure emergency medical care. This heartbreaking incident, which has drawn national attention, highlights how Texas’ stringent abortion laws impact healthcare for pregnant women experiencing severe complications. Crain’s story reveals the devastating consequences of restrictive policies and the obstacles they create for women in need of urgent care.
The Desperate Struggle for Medical Help
On October 29, 2023, Crain’s mother, Candace Fails, urgently pleaded with hospital staff to help her daughter, who was in visible distress. Crain, six months pregnant, was unable to walk, experiencing severe abdominal pain, and suffering from high fever and vomiting. Despite visiting two Texas emergency rooms within 12 hours, each trip left her feeling worse. Her final visit to a third hospital resulted in delayed care and, tragically, her death.
Crain’s ordeal began with a misdiagnosis at the first hospital, where she was told she had strep throat. Despite her severe symptoms, including sharp abdominal pain, no further investigation was conducted. During her second hospital visit, she screened positive for sepsis, a severe and life-threatening response to infection. However, doctors assured her that her fetus still had a heartbeat, deeming her stable enough for discharge. By her third visit, Crain’s condition was critical, with her blood pressure dangerously low, and her lips had turned blue due to oxygen deprivation. Hours later, she was dead.
Impact of Texas Abortion Restrictions on Maternal Healthcare
Fails, who was expecting to celebrate her daughter’s 20th birthday soon, was left bewildered by how her daughter’s critical condition failed to prompt an immediate response. Experts suggest that Texas’ strict abortion laws may have influenced the delay in treatment for Crain’s medical emergency.
Following the recent Texas abortion bans, healthcare providers have become increasingly cautious, fearing legal repercussions for any intervention that might affect a fetal heartbeat. Although Texas law permits abortion if a woman’s life is at serious risk, doctors report that uncertainty and fear of potential prosecution often lead them to delay or deny necessary care. Consequently, pregnant patients with complications can find themselves “bounced between hospitals like hot potatoes,” as medical professionals weigh legal risks.
Sara Rosenbaum, a health law professor at George Washington University, notes that pregnant women in states with restrictive abortion laws are “essentially untouchables” within the healthcare system. Crain’s story illustrates how even life-saving interventions can be delayed as medical staff work to ensure compliance with complex legal guidelines.
Federal Emergency Care Laws and Texas’ Opposition
According to federal law, hospitals are required to provide stabilizing care in emergencies, regardless of state abortion restrictions. The Biden administration argues that this law applies even when a medical abortion may be necessary. However, Texas strongly opposes this interpretation, warning doctors that state law supersedes federal guidance on emergency care for pregnant patients.
After the U.S. Supreme Court removed the constitutional right to abortion, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton challenged the federal government’s emergency care guidance, arguing that it “forces hospitals and doctors to commit crimes.” Consequently, Texas is now the only state not obligated to follow federal guidelines on emergency abortion care. Paxton’s stance has added to the uncertainty and fear among Texas doctors, who face up to 99 years in prison if they perform procedures deemed illegal under state law.
Medical Experts Weigh In on Missed Warning Signs
Medical professionals who reviewed Crain’s case agreed that her symptoms should have raised red flags much earlier. The initial hospital visit, where she was misdiagnosed with strep throat despite her abdominal pain and other symptoms, missed critical signs of infection. When she screened positive for sepsis at the second hospital, they believe she should never have been discharged. And during her final visit, they questioned why a second ultrasound was ordered to confirm fetal demise before initiating life-saving treatment.
Dr. Dara Kass, an emergency room physician in New York, criticized the multiple delays in Crain’s care, saying, “This is how these restrictions kill women.” Experts noted that if Crain had received timely monitoring and treatment, she and her fetus might have survived.
Personal Beliefs and the Conflict with Medical Policy
Crain and her mother opposed abortion, except in cases of rape or life-threatening complications, aligning their views with their Christian faith. When Crain learned she was expecting a daughter, she and her mother enthusiastically discussed baby names and clothing, ultimately deciding to name her Lillian. For Fails, the possibility of losing both her daughter and granddaughter was overwhelming. She believes doctors prioritized fetal heartbeat monitoring over Crain’s life-threatening symptoms, a perspective she expressed by saying, “If I had to choose, I would have chosen my daughter.”
The Pain of Untreated Miscarriage and Final Moments
Crain’s final hours reflect the distress caused by untreated medical emergencies in Texas. The day before her baby shower, Crain awoke feeling unwell, and her symptoms quickly worsened. When her condition deteriorated, her boyfriend, Randall Broussard, rushed her to the emergency room. Hospital staff checked her fetal heartbeat but ultimately sent her home with antibiotics, failing to address her abdominal pain and vomiting fully.
Her second hospital visit yielded similar results, with minimal intervention despite her high fever and rapid pulse—signs of sepsis. Dr. William Hawkins, the attending OB-GYN, discharged her after two hours, prescribing antibiotics for a urinary tract infection. Hawkins’ medical history includes previous reprimands for missed diagnoses, raising questions about whether Crain’s care met the standard required in such severe circumstances.
Legal Obstacles Prevent Accountability
Following Crain’s death, Fails sought justice for what she perceives as negligence in her daughter’s care. However, Texas law imposes a higher standard for emergency room cases, requiring proof of “willful and wanton negligence” rather than standard medical malpractice. Thus, legal avenues for families in similar situations remain limited under current state laws, leaving Fails with unanswered questions and grief.
The Widening Impact of Abortion Restrictions on Women’s Health
Crain’s tragic story underscores a growing crisis for pregnant women in Texas and other states with restrictive abortion laws. Medical teams struggle to provide timely care while navigating potential legal consequences, delaying critical interventions. Hospitals equipped to perform emergency abortions and handle high-risk pregnancies have seen increased patient transfers, as healthcare providers elsewhere fear legal repercussions.
While supporters of abortion restrictions argue the laws protect unborn lives, the impact on maternal healthcare cannot be ignored. As more stories like Crain’s emerge, the healthcare community and legal experts are calling for clearer guidelines to ensure that pregnant patients receive timely, life-saving care.
Conclusion: A Call for Change
Crain’s death serves as a sobering reminder of the human cost of restrictive abortion laws. Her family’s loss underscores the need for healthcare policies that balance legal requirements with patient safety. For now, Fails and others continue to grieve loved ones whose lives may have been saved if healthcare providers weren’t hindered by fear of legal repercussions.
The complexities surrounding abortion law enforcement in Texas reveal critical gaps in care that deserve urgent attention. Crain’s story is a call for compassionate and timely healthcare policies that prioritize the well-being of patients above legal uncertainty.