-
IOC's gender test directive throws up multiple questions
-
Trump insists Iran operations 'extremely' ahead of schedule
-
Bab al-Mandeb Strait: another key shipping route under threat
-
Families of Kabul bombing victims still search for answers
-
Police detain French ex-cop suspected of killing mothers of his children
-
Venezuela's Maduro back in court after stunning US capture
-
Senegal victims of 'most blatant scam' in football history: federation
-
Former badminton Olympic gold winner Marin retires due to injury
-
Olympic women's sport to be limited to biological females
-
Africa sets out stall for cotton at the WTO
-
Trump's Iran war tests MAGA 'America First' creed
-
What's happening with Iran-US 'talks'?
-
WTO mulls future of global trading under cloud of Mideast war
-
US flexes 'new order' trade policy as WTO meet kicks off
-
Germany unveils rescue plan for struggling chemical sector
-
UK PM 'very keen' to curb addictive social media after US ruling
-
South Africa disinvited from G7 in France after US pressure: Pretoria
-
EU moves closer to ban sexualised AI deepfakes
-
France bids farewell to ex-PM Jospin who 'modernised' nation
-
Belarus' Lukashenko gifts automatic rifle to North Korea's Kim
-
Germany bank on team spirit to end World Cup woes
-
Venezuela's Maduro back in US court after stunning capture
-
French court orders ex-bishop to pay over 1970s child sex abuse
-
PSG Ligue 1 game postponed in between two legs of Liverpool Champions League tie
-
Iran may believe it has the upper hand as Trump seeks talks
-
EU urged to broadly restrict 'forever chemicals'
-
Italy seizes millions 'embezzled' from Ursula Andress
-
Trump says Iran 'better get serious' in Mideast war talks
-
Global trading system hit by 'worst disruptions in the past 80 years': WTO chief
-
EU accuses four porn platforms of letting children access adult content
-
Cathay Pacific raises fuel surcharge on all flights by 34%
-
EU probes Snapchat over suspected child protection failings
-
EU parliament backs Trump tariff deal -- with conditions
-
'Return hubs' for migrants clear EU parliament hurdle
-
Meta watchdog says grassroots fact checks risk harm to users
-
G7 meets in France to mend transatlantic rupture on Iran
-
ByteDance quietly rolls out SeeDance 2.0 globally
-
Israel strikes Iran as Tehran rejects US talks overture
-
Mercedes teen ace Antonelli wants more of the same after maiden win
-
Singer Rosalia quits Milan concert with food poisoning
-
Oil climbs and equities sink amid mixed messages on 'talks'
-
'Get out': Verstappen bans reporter from Japan press conference
-
Leaked Nepal report into deadly uprising calls for prosecuting ex-PM
-
Verstappen says last-minute F1 rule tweak will help only 'a tiny bit'
-
Oil rises and equities mixed amid mixed messages on 'talks'
-
EU to vote on Trump tariff deal -- but eyes rest of world
-
Somalia football slowly becomes a women's game
-
Venezuela oil reserves both entice and repel energy giants
-
Hamilton says more committed to F1 than ever at 41
-
China bans runner after mid-marathon splits goes viral
US doctors embroiled in sudden legal uncertainty over abortions
Days after the US state of Ohio banned abortions once a fetal heartbeat is detected, doctor Mae Winchester had a patient who needed to terminate her pregnancy to save her life.
Her patient, who was 19 weeks pregnant, asked if "legally she was going to be OK and if legally I was going to be OK," Winchester told AFP.
It wouldn't have been a question when the nationwide right to abortion was still protected under the US constitution.
But the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling on June 24 -- and some states, including Ohio, moved quickly to restrict the procedure, sometimes only with exceptions for medical necessity.
Doctors across the country were thrust into an ambiguous legal landscape that they say threatens both their ability to do their jobs and their patients' health.
While her patient had a clear medical emergency, with the rug pulled out from under the nearly 50-year-old right, that night Winchester made a call to the hospital's lawyers.
"I know what I need to do medically. But from a legal standpoint, how do I protect her? How do I protect myself? How do I protect our institution? Our nurses and anesthesiologist that are going to be involved with this case? It affects everybody," she said.
Such concerns echoed by doctors from varying specialities caught in the crosshairs of new laws, as well as health care lawyers working to help providers navigate the shifting ground.
"It's a bizarre situation where doctors have to be nervous even when they're providing legitimate care for potentially life-threatening conditions," said Harry Nelson, managing partner at health care law firm Nelson Hardiman, which advises physicians.
- Lose license? Face jail? -
The penalties in new legislation can be severe and not limited to losing one's medical license, but also possible felony charges, years in jail and thousands of dollars in fines.
Even the threat of litigation will take a toll, said Nelson, noting that few organisations and individuals can withstand the financial, logistical and mental cost "without a significant level of stress."
Some authorities in states with tight abortion restrictions have said the concern is misplaced because of laws' exceptions for medical endangerment, with anti-abortion advocates accusing opponents of "fear mongering."
But the risk is taken seriously by the Department of Health and Human Services.
It has said the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) supersedes state abortion laws if the procedure is needed to stabilize a pregnant patient -- a move praised by abortion rights supporters, who have pressured President Joe Biden's administration to preserve access to the procedure.
But the guidance has come under fire, with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton suing the administration, saying it "seeks to transform every emergency room in the country into a walk-in abortion clinic."
It's unclear how zealous prosecutors will be, and a group of some 90 elected prosecutors from across the country as of July 14 have already said they will not pursue abortion cases.
But in Indiana, where abortion is still legal up to 22 weeks and the Republican-dominated legislature is considering tighter abortion restrictions, a doctor has already been threatened with investigation over performing the procedure for a 10-year-old rape victim who had to cross from neighboring Ohio.
The obstetrician-gynecologist (OB-GYN) was accused of not reporting the case, as state law requires in case of sex crimes involving minors -- an accusation has been disproved.
Nelson and other lawyers said much of the rhetoric amounts to "scare tactics" and political capitalization to garner support around one of the most hot-button issues in the country.
But he underscored that in states like Texas, Idaho and Oklahoma, which allow for civil lawsuits against anyone who knowingly "aids or abets" an abortion, there is real risk from "single issue agitated people who are... looking to make examples."
- 'Rock and a hard place' -
It's not only OB-GYNs who may be caught in the net, with doctors voicing fear over the impact on care for pregnant patients with diseases such as cancer, the treatment for which could harm a pregnancy.
Health care providers in states where abortion access is still available also are seeking advice, Nelson said, as anti-abortion leaders eye cross-border care as their next battleground.
"Because every situation is so different it's really hard for us to write guidelines, and everybody is asking for guidelines," said Wisconsin-based OB-GYN Kristin Lyerly, a legislative chair for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (ACOG).
ACOG has joined some 75 other health care organizations in condemning legislative interference in the patient-doctor relationship after the Supreme Court ruling.
"Pregnancy management is complicated but doctors have to do it, not politicians," Lyerly told AFP.
Since Roe v Wade was overturned she's heard from colleagues feeling "stuck between a rock and hard place."
"What are you supposed to do? Commit malpractice or go to jail for being a criminal for performing an abortion?"
L.Miller--AMWN