I could reasonably see those same groups creating their own app or buying an existing app and feeding the information to law enforcement that's willing to work with them.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/texas-abortion-h...
Their websites literally call themselves "[Location] Women's Clinic" and their tag line is something along the lines of "Take control. Start with a free abortion consultation today."
I wonder if they have to mention that they're not a medical practice during in-take.
Yup. Even in cases where they don't use "clinic" specifically, it's still something deliberately misleading. I used to live near a "Pregnancy Crisis Center" that was styled very much to look like a walk-in clinic; it was no such thing.
"Some men, like activist Santiago Mayer, have begun to sign up for accounts themselves in an attempt to distort the data."
Santiago is reported as having three periods a month. A new normal some may ask?
I have a question though- Do abortion clinics in other states have to comply with subpoenas?
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/miscarria... lists examples from Texas, California, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Nevada, and South Carolina
Ohio for example has just enacted a 6 week abortion ban (which for non uterus havers is effectively a total ban).
* If someone from an absorption clinic fudged the paperwork to put you under 6 weeks period tracker app data can be subpoenaed to provide evidence otherwise.
* In states that are trying to make it illegal to have an abortion anywhere if you get pregnant, travel out of state or out of country to abort, and then are witch hunted by someone they can again subpoena your period tracker to provide evidence that you were pregnant.
I'm skimming the article and yes, I don't see that mentioned anywhere, despite that being the lynchpin of the whole article.
I suppose a pregnancy would throw off a woman's menstrual cycle, but so can many other things. No way that a mere scheduling change of a woman's period would hold up in court as evidence of an an illegal abortion.
One of the interviewees also implies that states will start criminalizing miscarriage, which is just idiotic. Nobody involved in this article has actually thought these ideas through.
I of course was speaking of uninduced miscarriages, which happens shockingly often - one in four pregnancies, if my memory serves me correctly from the time it happened to me and my ex.
It doesn't matter in the end if the person had a miscarriage, had an abortion, or was never pregnant in the first place - it could still be used as "evidence" if someone wanted to go after them.
I think it's a combination of denial and an absurdly strong desire to be seen as "above the political fray." That or they're all auditioning for writers positions at The Atlantic.
few people are saying "the gestapo will literally be called to your house the second you miss a period in a red state"
but rather, that this data can and will be used as collaborating evidence in a criminal trial.
a state prosecuting an abortion will have to prove the person is actually pregnant, and there is zero reason to believe they wouldn't use this data as one more tool in their arsenal building a rock solid case. it's not as if people undergoing illegal abortions are going to have good records that can be looked up otherwise
you are a bad person