At Idaho Trial, Center Plaintiffs Discuss Damaging Impact of State’s Abortion Bans

With testimony from Idaho women denied abortion care despite facing dire pregnancy complications, the Center for Reproductive Rights recently presented arguments in Adkins v. State of Idaho, a case challenging the medical exceptions to the state’s abortion bans.

The trial, held November 12–21, took place at the Ada County Courthouse in Boise. Doctors prevented from providing patient care under the state’s bans also testified before the court.

Filed in 2023, the case seeks to clarify and expand the bans’ medical exceptions to ensure that doctors can legally perform abortion care to preserve a pregnant person’s health and safety, including in cases of fatal fetal diagnoses.

The women denied abortion care received diagnoses of severe and fatal fetal conditions that also risked their own health and lives. Due to the state’s abortion bans, they were unable to obtain medically necessary care in Idaho and were forced to travel out of state for care.

“All four of these women were overjoyed to be pregnant with their second child and all four of them received the worst news a mother can imagine,” said Gail Deady, the Center’s Senior Staff Attorney, addressing the court. All the women sought abortions “to protect their health, to spare their babies from pain and suffering, and to remain alive and healthy to protect their young children,” she continued.

Press Conference Held After the First Day of Arguments

After the first day of testimony, Deady and the plaintiffs spoke to the press outside the courthouse.

Comments by lead plaintiff Jennifer Adkins:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Center for Reproductive Rights (@reprorights)

Other Center plaintiffs speaking at the press conference included:

• Rebecca Vincen-Brown: “Being on the receiving end of a fatal fetal diagnosis is devastating and heartbreaking. Receiving that news while living in Idaho, with limited maternal care options, takes that shock and horror to a whole new level. . . I’ll be honest with you: we never imagined we would need an emergency abortion for a child we tried for for so long. These situations only seem rare until they happen to you or someone you know and love.”
• Jillaine St.Michel: “There was no option for us that would lead to a healthy baby. But because of Idaho’s cruel abortion bans, instead of mourning our loss at home with family and friends, we had to figure out how to scramble to get out of state, how to pay for it, and how to travel with a toddler to receive the essential medical care I desperately needed in that moment: an abortion that would keep me physically and emotionally healthy. . . No woman should have to question, in their worst moments, whether they can get the urgent medical care they need. No woman should ever have to question whether the provider in front of her is willing to put their career at risk to help save her life. No one should have to feel this inconsequential or devalued by their own state.” 
• Kayla Smith: “I never imagined I would be standing here in front of all of you today alongside these strong women, in this time, grieving not only the loss of our pregnancies, but also the loss of our bodily autonomy and right to self-determination. . . When my husband and I found out that our expectant son had several fatal fetal conditions only two days after Idaho’s trigger ban went into effect, no one could help us in the state where we lived. These laws are not allowing our doctors to treat us with compassion or to offer us the standard of medical care for the dire situations we find ourselves in.”
• Jennifer Adkins: “Instead of grieving the loss of our baby with family and friends, we were forced to scramble and travel to find the care I needed. . . So we grieved the loss of our daughter alone, and had to leave the medical team that we had grown to love and trust through our previous pregnancy.”
• Dr. Crystal L. Pyrak, president of the Idaho Academy of Family Physicians: “As a family physician who delivers babies, I can tell you that my priority is always the health and well-being of my patient. Laws written by politicians that interfere with the physician-patient relationship should never stand in the way of a doctor providing the standard of care each patient needs for their unique circumstance.”
• Dr. Emily Corrigan, an OB/GYN and one of the Center’s physician plaintiffs: “I see it every day: the health care system in Idaho is crumbling. Reproductive health care providers have endured significant moral and professional injury these past two years. We have been forced to violate our oath and deny care to our patients that we are trained to provide. . . The national standard of care should not simply disappear when you cross state lines into a ban state like Idaho. All Americans should have access to evidence-based health care regardless of where they live. The state of Idaho is failing women, their families and Idaho’s doctors.”

>> Read more about the plaintiffs’ stories here. 

“The court must protect pregnant Idahoans and give doctors clarity on what circumstances qualify as exceptions,” said Deady. “We are simply asking the state to allow doctors to use their own medical judgment without fear of prosecution.”