Providence St. Joseph Faces Another Abortion Lawsuit

The first sentence of local chiropractor Anna Nusslock’s lawsuit filed against Providence St. Joseph Hospital on April 1 cuts to the very heart of her allegations.

“When Dr. Nusslock was experiencing a life-threatening medical emergency at [St. Joseph] Hospital, defendants callously, discriminatorily and illegally denied her care, causing harm that reverberates to this day,” the complaint’s introduction reads.

Nusslock’s allegations that the hospital violated state law by refusing to provide her an emergency abortion procedure because she was not “sufficiently close to death” to warrant an exception from the hospital’s faith-based policies have already been widely reported, as they were the basis for a lawsuit filed against the hospital by the state of California in September. But Nusslock’s suit — brought by the high-powered nonprofit National Women’s Law Center — adds another layer of insight into how St. Joseph’s alleged conduct has impacted Nusslock’s life, as well as another pressure point on the hospital’s adherence to the religious directives on abortion care that some allege are in conflict with state law, which had already been the focus of the state lawsuit and another brought by a woman in October.

Nusslock’s suit specifically alleges the hospital violated the state’s Emergency Services law by denying her emergency medical care, ordering her “unlawful nonmedical transfer” to another hospital, denied her services based on her pregnant status, both intentionally and negligently inflicted emotional distress on her, and engaged in unfair business practices. The suit seeks unspecified damages to be determined after a trial, as well as statutory damages of no less than $4,000, punitive damages, a declaration from the hospital that its abortion policy violates state law and a court order prohibiting St. Joseph from “denying emergency abortion care to pregnant patients suffering from an emergency medical condition.”

“My life was at risk when I went to Providence, but they refused to provide care due to their religious policies,” Nusslock said in a press release issued by the National Women’s Law Center after the suit was filed. “Since that experience, my health has continued to deteriorate. Still, I’m fighting for myself and others who could face this nightmare. No one should be denied life-saving medical care.”

In a press statement issued after the lawsuit was filed, Providence St. Joseph described the experience described Nusslock’s lawsuit as “deeply saddening and troubling,” saying the hospital is committed to “delivering care in accordance with federal and state law, as well as our mission as a faith-based organization.”

“This includes providing emergency life-saving medical interventions that may result in indirect fetal death,” the statement continues. “As a Catholic health care organization, we are transparent that we do not perform elective abortions. However, in emergencies, our care teams provide medically necessary interventions to protect pregnant patients who are miscarrying or facing serious life-threatening conditions.”

Since the closure of Mad River Community Hospital’s labor and delivery unit last fall, St. Joseph Hospital serves as the only place in Humboldt County pregnant patients can give birth in a hospital setting.

In her lawsuit, Nusslock alleges she was 15 weeks into a high-risk pregnancy with twins in February of 2024 when she rushed to the St. Joseph Hospital emergency room after her water broke. There, she was diagnosed with previable preterm premature rupture of membranes, known as previable PPROM. The condition essentially means her water broke before her fetuses were able to live outside her uterus, and Nusslock was told her twins had no chance of survival, even though monitors still registered they had fetal heart tones.

According to the National Institute of Health, previable PPROM is known to be associated with poor health outcomes for mothers, with risks of infection, sepsis, bleeding hemorrhaging and shock.

According to the lawsuit, the on-call physician at St. Joseph who treated Nusslock, Sarah McGraw and a health team at University of California at San Francisco that had been advising Nusslock throughout her pregnancy recommended Nusslock immediately have an emergency procedure to terminate her pregnancy, consistent with the recognized standard of care. Nusslock was given the choice of induction — initiating labor — or a surgical abortion, according to the suit.

“Anna agreed with the recommended emergency procedure to end her pregnancy, because she understood neither twin could be saved and that the abortion care that UCSF and Dr. McGraw recommended was necessary to prevent further serious injury to her own health and the possible danger of loss of her life,” the complaint states. “In considering the two options for ending her pregnancy, Anna opted for an induction so that she could labor, give birth to and grieve her twins.”

But the suit alleges McGraw then informed Nusslock she could not provide the recommended emergency care due to St. Joseph policy “as long as one of Anna’s fetuses had detectable heart tones, unless Anna was sufficiently close to death.”

“Due to Defendants’ policy, all Dr. McGraw could offer was ‘expectant management’ — meaning to ‘wait and see’ for any changes in Anna’s medical conditions — such as the twins’ heart tones stopping on their own or Anna reaching the point where she was ‘actively dying,'” the lawsuit alleges. “Immediately after explaining this to Anna, Dr. McGraw said: ‘I know, it’s just horrible.’ Anna was struck by the overwhelming feeling that she was bleeding to death. Shocked and terrified, she tearfully pleaded with Dr. McGraw, ‘Please don’t let me die.'”

Dr. McGraw suggested Nusslock take a medical evacuation helicopter to UCSF to have the necessary procedure there but Nusslock says in the suit that this wasn’t a “realistic option” as it would cost $40,000 and separate her from her husband, Daniel, who would not be permitted to travel with her. According to the suit, Nusslock asked they could simply drive to UCSF but was told by McGraw that if she tried, “You will hemorrhage and die before you get to a place that can help you.”

McGraw then told Nusslock that Mad River Community Hospital would “take her” and, “increasingly fearing for her life,” Nusslock agreed to leave St. Joseph and have her husband drive her to Arcata. The suit alleges St. Joseph Hospital staff did not explain the risks involved with leaving the hospital, “much less provide any care or assistance to ensure that Anna could safely get there.” Instead, she alleges, a nurse at St. Joseph gave her a bucket and some towels before she left, “in case something happens in the car.”

By the time Nusslock arrived at Mad River, her bleeding had increased and her condition was so dire that the treating doctor there recommended emergency surgery, the suit alleges, noting that “the induction Anna wanted was no longer an option.” While being wheeled into the operating room, the suit alleges Nusslock “felt sudden, intense pressure and pain.”

“She told the nurse that something had happened and there was a lot of blood,” the suit alleges. “The nurse checked under Anna’s gown and a horrified expression appeared in her eyes, prompting Anna to ask if it was her baby. The nurse replied, ‘Yes.’ Anna had spontaneously delivered one of her twins and was actively hemorrhaging.”

Nusslock then received a procedural abortion.

The suit alleges the experience caused Nusslock “tremendous harm” and she suffers from severe anxiety, depression and pain, and has been diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Additionally, the suit alleges she continues to experience insomnia and “traumatizing flashbacks” in which she panics, thinking she is bleeding to death.

The suit alleges Nusslock is not the first person who has suffered from St. Joseph Hospital’s abortion policies and absent court intervention, “she will not be the last.”

St. Joseph Hospital has not officially responded to the complaint but argued in February a lawsuit brought by the California Attorney General stemming from Nusslock’s experience should be dismissed on procedural and legal grounds. Attorneys representing Providence St. Joseph argued the hospital acted in accordance with state law, transferring Nusslock to Mad River for medical reasons (to receive the needed abortion), and that requiring the hospital to perform the procedure would violate its First Amendment rights to implement policies in line with its religious beliefs, and not to perform procedures deemed in conflict with those policies.

A judge is set to rule on the hospital’s request to dismiss the suit next month.

In the statement issued in response to Nusslock’s suit, St. Joseph Hospital reiterated it is “committed to providing high-quality, compassionate care.”

“As a part of this commitment, we recently enhanced our training, education and escalation protocols to further ensure the best possible care,” the hospital’s statement said. “We take our responsibility as a vital safety net incredibly seriously and we are committed to continuing to meet the needs of our community, just as we have for more than a century.”

In the press release announcing the latest suit, National Women’s Law Center Senior Counsel K.M. Bell said the nonprofit intends to hold Providence accountable for “abandoning Anna in her time of need.”

Hospitals cannot be allowed to pick and choose which emergencies they treat based on ideology,” Bell said. “Our goal is to ensure that every pregnant patient can access the emergency care they need and to prevent tragedies like this from happening again.”

Thadeus Greenson (he/him) is the Journal’s news editor. Reach him at (707) 442-1400, extension 321, or thad@northcoastjournal.com.

This article appears in How the Klamath Dams came down.