Women who were denied abortions in three states with near-total bans have launched legal complaints in an attempt to chip away at the prohibitions in their states, saying their lives were at stake when they were denied necessary medical treatment.

The women, represented by the Center for Reproductive Rights, are asking courts in Idaho, Tennessee and Oklahoma to clarify when doctors can invoke medical exceptions to the abortion bans, allowing a pregnant woman facing complications to receive an abortion.

A federal complaint to the Department of Health and Human Services was also launched on behalf of Jaci Statton, an Oklahoma mother, over an Oklahoma emergency room not treating her nonviable pregnancy and a condition called partial molar pregnancy, which could lead to cancer and requires urgent medical care.

Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, Ms. Statton’s lawyers say, the hospital should have treated Ms. Statton, who was hemorrhaging and suffering from dizziness. The complaint asks the federal government to launch a probe into the hospital for its conduct.

Ms. Statton said she was turned away from several doctors — first after an ultrasound tech declined to consent to her abortion, suggesting he still heard a heartbeat. She said, though, that all the doctors told her she had the same dangerous condition.

She eventually traveled to Kansas to obtain the abortion, unsure if she would make the hours-long drive due to her bleeding.

“Oklahoma’s laws nearly killed me,” said Ms. Statton. “Even though I had an extremely dangerous pregnancy and was repeatedly bleeding, I was told to wait in a hospital parking lot until I was near death in order to get the life-saving care I needed. No one ever thinks they need an abortion, but I am living proof that abortion is healthcare. It’s not safe to be pregnant in Oklahoma. With this complaint, I want to make sure that no one else has to suffer the way I did.”

Her federal complaint alleges the hospital ran afoul of federal law and should be penalized.

Specifically, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires hospitals to stabilize patients and not discharge them during a medical crisis.

“Pregnant people should not have to fear that they will be denied life-saving treatment from Oklahoma hospitals, nor should they be forced to wait until they are at death’s door before health care providers intervene,” the complaint said.

A spokesperson from the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In the Tennessee case, the Center for Reproductive Rights’ lawsuit contends the state’s law is vague and has caused medical professionals to not treat women who are at risk of health consequences for themselves due to dangerous pregnancies.

Nicole Blackmon, one of three Tennessee women in the complaint, was unable to travel to another state for an abortion due to finances and ended up giving birth to a stillborn despite being warned that her baby’s condition was fatal in the womb because the organs were not properly developing.

During her pregnancy, she was taken off medication needed to treat severe health issues she had related to swelling of her brain, which caused headaches.

After 32 hours of labor, she gave birth to her stillborn.

Tennessee lawmakers had passed a near total abortion ban, but later added some medical exceptions to the law such as saving the life of the mother or ending a molar or ectopic pregnancy.

“That law forced me to carry a baby for months that was never going to live and easily could have killed me,” Ms. Blackmon said.

The Center for Reproductive Rights launched a similar lawsuit against Idaho’s abortion law, which only allows abortions to save the life of the mother or in the case of rape or incest, once the incidents are reported to law enforcement.

Dr. Emily Corrigan, an OB-GYN in Boise, said the vague exceptions have not clarified circumstances for doctors and have led to many of them leaving the state, worried about doing their work and facing penalties over performing abortions.

She said the lack of physicians has caused lengthy wait times for cervical screenings, among other female medical needs.

“Doctors are not lawyers,” she said. “We were not trained in our years and years of training to think about treating patients in these circumstances.”

Representatives from Idaho and Tennessee did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the lawsuits.

Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that after the Supreme Court upended the national right to abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health last year, 14 states have imposed near total bans on abortions.

Her organization, though its litigation announced Tuesday, is suing three of the 14.

“Patients are forced to continue dangerous pregnancies,” she said of the bans in Tennessee, Oklahoma and Idaho. “Doctors are put in an untenable position.”

In June 2022, the high court ruled 6-3 that the issue of abortion should be sent back to the states, overruling Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark ruling that had legalized abortion nationwide.

The opinion, authored by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., said abortion historically was an issue for the states to regulate.

• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.