The truth about the brain-dead mother giving birth — and why it’s the right choice



When young Georgia mother Adriana Smith began experiencing persistent headaches, she sought medical help. She was given medication and sent on her way.

Tragically, her family is now in mourning. Smith suffered severe blood clots to her brain, was found unresponsive, and then declared brain-dead. However, Smith was two months pregnant at the time and is now being kept on life support in order for her to still give birth to her child.

“Of course, you’ve got pro-choicers and pro-abortion advocates saying, ‘This is so awful, this is using this woman as a lifeless incubator, and they should have just let her off life support, let the baby die,’” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey comments.


“You’ve even got some of her family members saying, ‘Oh, we should have a choice,’” she continues, disturbed. “I have said, ‘Of course, we should give this baby a chance at life.’ And I actually thought that this whole situation was being made possible by Georgia’s pro-life law, anti-abortion law.”

“I was wrong about that. It actually has nothing to do with the Georgia abortion law, and that’s exactly what the left wants you to think, what pro-abortionists want you to think, that this is because of some draconian, archaic, pro-life law in Georgia, and that this has to do with the overturning of Roe V. Wade,” Stuckey explains.

Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr’s office has released a statement clarifying that the hospital is not required by the pro-life law to maintain life support for a brain-dead patient, because removing life support is not an action with the purpose of terminating a pregnancy.

“It’s not the law’s fault. It might be the lawyer’s fault, it might be the hospital administration’s fault, it might be the doctor’s fault, it might be you, the activist’s fault, but it is not actually the law’s fault,” Stuckey explains.

However, one Georgia law concerning life support may be to blame.

“So Georgia code 31329 from 2007 states that doctors can’t withdraw life support from pregnant patients unless both, one, the fetus is not viable, and two, the patient had an advanced directive explicitly stating she wanted withdrawal of life-sustaining measures,” she continues.

While the news coverage is clouded with assumptions, propaganda, and mixed responses on both ends of the political spectrum — Stuckey knows where she stands.

“In this case, there’s an opportunity to save this child, and I would think that her family would want this, that the father of this child would want this, and that the mother would want this,” Stuckey says, adding, “Yes, I would absolutely sacrifice my body so that my child could live, and so that is my perspective.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Trump did not outlaw emergency abortion: Why abortion activists can put the Handmaid’s Tale cloaks away



The Trump administration’s reversal of a Biden-era policy regarding hospitals being required to perform emergency abortions has abortion activists up in arms — despite there actually being no threat to pregnant women who need emergency care.

“You have probably seen headlines going around, especially on Instagram, saying that Trump is now letting hospitals allow women to die, women who need these life-saving abortions we hear are now going to bleed out and die because of Trump’s draconian and cruel anti-abortion policies,” BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey says on “Relatable.”

“It is almost always the case when it comes to pro-abortion propaganda that the story that you are reading, that those little pro-abortion influencers and accounts are pushing, that it’s just not true,” she continues.


The policy in question is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act that was passed in 1986 and requires hospitals to provide necessary emergency care, including for pregnant women, to stabilize serious medical conditions.

The law’s initial intent was to ensure patient access to emergency medical care and to prevent the practice of “patient dumping,” which is when patients are transferred from private to public hospitals without considering their medical condition or stability for transfers.

The Biden administration issued a guidance on this law in 2022 that interpreted EMTALA as requiring hospitals to perform abortions in emergency rooms, even in states with pro-life laws.

“So you can see, if you’re familiar at all with how the left interprets these kind of health care laws, you can see the problem right away, because how the left interprets the health or life of the mother or the stability of the mother, is not that the woman’s life actually has to be at risk,” Stuckey explains.

“They refer to a Supreme Court case called Doe vs. Bolton, where health and life of the mother is defined as not only the physical health of the mother, but the mental health of the mother, the financial situation of the mother, the familial circumstances of the mother,” she continues.

“So it was actually the Biden administration that was infringing upon people’s rights here, it’s not the Trump administration,” she adds.

The Trump administration rescinded this 2022 guidance in a statement arguing it wrongly turned emergency rooms into abortion clinics by forcing doctors to perform elective abortions.

“Which is true, because a woman could come in and say, ‘I have to have an abortion, I don’t feel stable, or I’m not feeling good or whatever,’ and instead of a doctor saying, ‘We can help you in different ways,’ or ‘Here’s where you need to go, let me give you other resources,’ they would be required by the Biden administration to perform an abortion,” Stuckey explains.

“So the Trump administration’s policy clarifies that EMTALA does not mandate abortions beyond what is necessary for emergency care, aligning with the law’s intent to protect both the mother and the unborn child,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Federal Courts Protect Women’s Right To Safely Reverse Chemical Abortions

Pro-life pregnancy centers get big win ensuring the protection of their right to free speech against radical leftist attorneys general.

Major Abortion Activists Endorse Biden’s Reelection Bid Ahead Of Dobbs Anniversary

'There is so much at stake,'

Elaine Brown Sold Out Black Americans To Planned Parenthood

Black people are disproportionately affected by abortion, a thinly veiled genocide.

Abortion Activists Don’t Speak For This Rape Survivor Who Loved Her ‘Innocent’ Unborn Child

Abortion activists insist that children conceived in rape must be aborted, but this young pro-life woman wants you to know there is another way.
Alex Wong/Getty Images

The first thing Republicans should do when they take back Congress is impeach Merrick Garland

Garland has weaponized the DOJ and the FBI, using them as blunt instruments to criminalize the Biden administration’s political opposition.

Post-Dobbs, The Abortion Battle Hits Activist State Courts

Abortion extremists have been working for years to ensure that if Roe and Casey were overturned, abortion-on-demand would remain the law of the land.

‘Chilling,’ ‘deeply concerning,’ ‘bad news for the whole world’: Global abortion advocates melt down over potential worldwide reverberations of US overturning Roe v. Wade



A leaked draft indicating that the U.S. Supreme Court is set to overturn its landmark ruling on abortion in Roe v. Wade sent progressive politicians and abortion advocates in the U.S. spiraling into a frenzy Monday night. But the pandemonium didn't stop at the nation's borders; rather, the reverberations could be felt around the globe.

According to VICE News, abortion activists all around the world lashed out Monday into Tuesday, lamenting over the potential "disturbing" and "chilling" consequences that the U.S. ruling could have on abortion rights in other countries and the movement at large.

"This is really bad news for the whole world," Polish abortion activist Natalia Broniarczyk told the outlet.

Hanneke van Halen, from Abortion Network Amsterdam, added in regret that "the normalisation of patriarchal violence in a world-dominating country like the US will have an impact on the reproductive rights of people everywhere."

Mandu Reid, who leads the U.K.’s Women's Equality Party (WEP), told VICE: "This is chilling news coming from the US, it is the latest disturbing attack on reproductive rights amidst a global backlash against women's equality."

Apparently, news that the U.S. had finally decided to dispel its invented notion that a woman has the constitutional right to kill an unborn child without government interference was "deeply concerning" to foreign activists.

Moreover, the fact that a majority of appointed justices would rule it better to instead return the controversial matter to the states, where elected lawmakers would decide what to do, was evidently troubling, too.

"We're talking about a handful of people — mostly conservative men — making life-changing decisions about women's bodily autonomy without their consent. But this applies to the UK too, where free, safe, and legal abortion still isn't a legal right and where underfunding leads to difficulties in women accessing contraception and abortions," Reid further argued.

Sarah Shaw, head of advocacy for MSI Reproductive Choices, a global pro-abortion group, expressed fear that if Roe v. Wade is overturned, "it would be the biggest setback to women’s rights in the U.S. in a generation and deeply concerning for global reproductive rights."

Together, many of the activists expressed support for the speedy codification of abortion rights in countries where such is possible. The same idea was posited in the U.S. by Democratic politicians — led by President Joe Biden — as a way to protect women's ability to terminate pregnancies without punishment.

In a draft decision obtained by Politico on Monday, Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, said, "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," referring to two separate decisions that enshrined and upheld abortion rights.

Alito went on to call Roe "egregiously wrong from the start."

"Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division," he continued, adding, "It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives."

These Preemies Prove The Supreme Court’s ‘Viability’ Standard For Abortion Is Wrong

Supreme Court decisions say that mothers may obtain an abortion for mere convenience 'before viability.' This arbitrary test leads to troubling results, such as killing babies like Curtis.