Women and doctors are grappling with heart-wrenching decisions under what may be the strictest abortion ban in the U.S. — Idaho. As Jennifer Adkins and her husband contemplated having their second child, the implications of the state’s near-total abortion ban lingered in the back of their minds. Adkins had enjoyed a smooth first pregnancy, opting out of an epidural during delivery. She expected her second pregnancy would follow suit, but everything changed dramatically in April 2023.
At 12 weeks pregnant, an ultrasound delivered devastating news. The couple had nicknamed the fetus “Spooky” in honor of the October due date, but the scan revealed severe complications. Adkins’ doctors informed her that Spooky displayed multiple signs of a chromosomal disorder alongside dangerously severe swelling — conditions typically leading to miscarriage or death shortly after birth. Additionally, continuing the pregnancy could jeopardize Adkins’ life due to the risk of life-threatening pre-eclampsia.
Sitting in a coffee shop near Boise, a visibly emotional Adkins recounted the experience: “I don’t think you can truly understand how scary and awful it is until you’re in that situation.” According to Idaho law, abortions can occur only in medical emergencies. However, her case didn’t meet the threshold deemed an emergency — her doctors were too fearful of potential repercussions from the state’s stringent abortion laws to even refer her to an out-of-state clinic.
This left the couple scrambling, calling clinics in Washington, Oregon, and Utah in search of an appointment — all while managing the logistical nightmare of financing travel and the procedure itself. “We were trying to figure out how to mourn the loss of a baby we really wanted, while figuring out these logistics,” she said. “None of us feel good about making that decision. But it is a loving choice we should be able to make for our family.”
Adkins isn’t alone. Many women have reported being denied medically necessary abortions since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which paved the way for numerous states to impose strict bans. Although these laws technically allow for abortion in emergencies, the vague wording leaves medical professionals unsure of when they can legally intervene. As a result, many doctors feel compelled to delay treatment until patients face dire consequences, often waiting until they are critically ill.
Idaho, as the epicenter of these restrictive measures, serves as a cautionary tale for other states. The state’s crackdown on abortion has resulted in a significant exodus of healthcare providers, compounding existing issues related to maternal and infant mortality rates. “Idaho is a textbook example of the playbook for those opposed to abortion access and reproductive healthcare,” noted Jessica Waters, a professor at American University specializing in reproductive rights. “Everything happening in Idaho could potentially play out across the country.”
The landscape for abortion access could be influenced even more if Donald Trump were to reclaim the presidency. While he recently stated he would veto a national ban, his past flip-flops on the issue raise concerns. The controversial Project 2025 policy proposal suggests utilizing the Comstock Act—a law from 1873—to ban the mailing of abortion-related materials, threatening access to abortion pills, which constitute about two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S.
“Thinking about my family and future patients, we made the difficult decision to leave [Idaho] because of the bans,” shared Dr. Kylie Cooper, who left the state for Minnesota to avoid the legal ramifications of providing necessary medical care. Over 22% of Idaho obstetricians left their positions within 15 months of the ban’s implementation, and hospitals are closing labor and delivery wards as a result.
Rebekka Schaffner, pregnant with a high-risk pregnancy, recalled her own harrowing experience after suffering a miscarriage last year. Doctors hesitated to provide standard treatment out of fear of violating the law, ultimately leading her to the hospital with an infection. “They should have handled it properly, and I wouldn’t have gotten sick,” she lamented.
Adkins eventually received the abortion she needed at a clinic in Oregon, after an exhausting search. Although an abortion fund aided her with costs, the emotional toll of leaving her home state amid such a loss was overwhelming. She later joined a lawsuit urging the state to clarify its medical exceptions regarding abortions.
As she nursed her infant, Adkins shared her resolve for the future: “Now that the stakes are extremely high with this election, we decided to take a firmer stance on preventing pregnancy. I don’t know what kind of access to care I’m going to have.”