Representative Kat Cammack of Florida’s 3rd district has spent the last decade in politics. Over this time she has voted consistently for anti-abortion laws in her state over her tenure as a congresswoman. She voted for and was the lead sponsor for the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act in 2021 and 2023. She also has been co-chair for the House Pro-Life Caucus which promotes anti-abortion legislation.

In May 2025, Kat Cammack had complications with an ectopic pregnancy. Her healthcare providers delayed care due to the laws that Cammack has voted for.

The Florida abortion ban uses broad language defining abortion as ending a pregnancy in any way other than birth. This kind of definition leaves room for the criminalization of ectopic pregnancy treatment, forcing health providers and administrators to tread carefully. The text of anti-abortion legislation is vague and often does not include explicit exceptions, for treatment of ectopic pregnancy or other medical emergencies, but it carries significant penalties such as felony charges or loss of medical license.

When Adriana Smith went to the hospital, complaining of headaches, she was given some medicine and sent home. Just one day later, her boyfriend would discover her struggling to breathe. Adriana was admitted to the hospital, and several blood clots were discovered in her brain; she was declared brain dead. Adriana was 9 weeks pregnant at this time, and due to Georgia's Heartbeat Abortion Law, doctors and medical staff felt they needed to keep her on life support to incubate her fetus.

This is the story of Adriana, a nurse, mother, sister, daughter, and girlfriend. Adriana, who became brain dead in February of 2025, was kept on life support due to the fetal cardiac activity. Her case created a medical ethics controversy that has sparked a nationwide discussion about restrictive abortion care and end-of-life care.

Adriana's GoFundMe Link:

https://gofund.me/aade5ceb7

Crisis Pregnancy Centers or Maternal Wellness Centers are a unique and disconcerting hybrid of anti-choice activism, religious propagandism, and pseudo-medical practice. They are fundamentally unethical and undermine the respect for human life that they claim to protect. The government faces significant barriers to implementing regulations for CPCs. As states across the country threaten to severely restrict, and in some cases eliminate access to abortion, efforts to limit the influence of CPCs will become vital.

There are a lot of CPCs in the United States. Here are some websites you can utilize to see what clinics near you are Crisis Pregnancy Centers or legitimate health clinics.

www.exposefakeclinics.com

www.crisispregnancycentermap.com

What happens when constituents vote to approve abortion rights, yet their elected officials are “pro-life” or anti-abortion themselves?

This episode dives into how Republicans go against the majority of their voters on abortion rights. Voter-approved ballot initiatives represent the direct expression of the people's preferences. When politicians seek to overturn or weaken these measures, it can be seen as a direct challenge to the democratic process.

This episode concludes the remaining plaintiffs in Zurawski v. State of Texas. Being forced to carry a pregnancy to term when the fetus has a condition deemed a fetal anomaly, mainly if that condition is fatal or severely debilitating, presents a deeply distressing and ethically complex situation for women.

Women face the agonizing reality of knowing their baby will likely not survive or will have a very short and difficult life while still experiencing the physical and emotional changes of pregnancy. This anticipatory grief can be overwhelming and isolating.

These are the stories of the brave women who joined together against the State of Texas and its abortion bans.

If you or someone you know has a story they would like to share, please reach out to our email: mia.theaccesspodcast@gmail.com

Many people do not understand that the risk of maternal mortality is not just about the dangers of childbirth itself but the continuing effects of pregnancy and delivery, which may not show up until months later like high blood pressure, heart conditions, infections, or hemorrhage. The maternal mortality rate in the United States has been higher than in any other major industrialized country for more than two decades.

The case of Zurawski v. State of Texas was aimed to clarify the scope of these medical exceptions and to allow doctors to use their professional judgment in determining when an abortion is medically necessary. Their experiences highlight the real-world consequences of the state's abortion bans and the fear among doctors of facing legal repercussions.

This episode highlights the original plaintiffs who joined Amanda Zurawski in her lawsuit against the state of Texas.

The first lawsuit we will focus on is Zurawski v. State of Texas.

This is a significant legal case that addresses the complexities of medical exceptions within Texas's restrictive abortion laws. This lawsuit includes 20 women and 2 doctors. We will highlight each plaintiff and the impact of Texas’s abortion bans in the next few weeks.

The lead plaintiff in this case is a woman named Amanda Zurawski, from Austin, Texas. When Amanda was 18 weeks pregnant, she experienced pre-term labor rupture of membranes. She was denied abortion care due to doctors still detecting fetal cardiac activity. Three days after being denied abortion care, Amanda started showing signs of infection and was diagnosed with sepsis, which is a life-threatening condition.