Being the details aren’t known, it’s hard to know if the mother knew it was a non viable pregnancy, if she received prenatal care, etc.

Per the article:

Andres’ pregnancy was relatively uneventful — every ultrasound was normal.
Then, shortly after her 37 week doctor’s appointment, Andres and her husband got sick.
Doctors monitored the baby while Andres was treated for dehydration. Assured her baby was OK, Andres was sent home. The next day, Andres felt better but could no longer feel her baby move. She called her doctor again, who told her to return to the emergency room.

Finally:

“And that was that,” she adds. “It was just out of the blue.”

What a horribly callous response from someone who obviously didn’t read the article. What was the purpose of your comment and speculation?

This is what the majority votes for, unfortunately…which includes many women.

This is such a cold editorial just further isolating someone who probably already feels lost and possibly alone in her situation.

Also from the article:

Andres works for the City of Austin in the Austin Public Health Department

As long as we’re gonna jump to conclusions, I’d venture a guess that as a young person working in public health in the most liberal city in this backwards state, she’s probably not one of those women. Either way, pro-abortion or pro-life, I don’t think “random infant death” was on the ballot. Yes, women’s health was delivered a huge blow, but it’s not the opinion of the majority.