by Jay Bookman, Florida Phoenix
May 24, 2025

By most common measures, the life of Adriana Smith ended three months ago, when a tragic series of undiagnosed blood clots left her brain dead, with no hope of recovery. Yet today, in a hospital room in Midtown Atlanta, Adriana’s body is still being kept alive by machines, without regard to her family’s wishes.

As someone who has been there, I know how difficult and extremely personal that decision can be, but I can only imagine what it must be like to have that choice stripped away, as it has been stripped away from Adriana’s loved ones by people who don’t know them, who know little of their circumstances, and deal with none of its consequences.

In Adriana’s case, she was nine weeks pregnant at the time the blood clots hit, which under some readings of Georgia law has meant that what remains of Adriana’s body is now under government control until the fetus can be safely extracted.

“She’s been breathing through machines for more than 90 days,” April Newkirk, Adriana’s mother, told 11Alive News. “It’s torture for me. I see my daughter breathing, but she’s not there.”

Doctors and lawyers at Emory Healthcare – but mainly the lawyers, I suspect – say that under Georgia’s anti-abortion law, they are required to keep Adriana’s body functioning as the fetus inside her develops. They are erring on the side of caution – not medical caution, but legal caution.

The law in question is the “Living Infants Fairness and Equality Act.” or the LIFE Act.

The main sponsor of that law, state Sen. Ed Setzler, says it’s working as intended in this case.

“I’m proud that the hospital recognizes the full value of the small human life living inside of this regrettably dying young mother,” Setzler told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “Mindful of the agony of this young mother’s family, the wisdom of modern medical science to be able to save the life of a healthy unborn child is something that I trust in future years will lead to great joy, with this child having a chance to grow into vibrant adulthood.”

Proud as he might be, Setzler isn’t the one who has to watch what’s left of his daughter lay lifeless in that hospital room, not alive exactly, with machines performing basic life functions, week after week. He isn’t the one who has to explain what’s happening to his seven-year-old grandson, Adriana’s son. If the fetus survives, he also isn’t the one who will have to raise the child. Doctors have warned Adriana’s family that the fetus has fluid on its brain, with unknown consequences.

“She’s pregnant with my grandson,” Newkirk said. “But he may be blind, may not be able to walk, may not survive once he’s born,” she said. “This decision should’ve been left to us.”

According to Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, however, Emory Healthcare and Setzler are misreading the legislation.

“There is nothing in the LIFE Act that requires medical professionals to keep a woman on life support after brain death,” his office said in a statement. “Removing life support is not an action ‘with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy’.”

Carr’s reading of the law seems to be correct. As his statement indicates, the law defines abortion as “the act of using, prescribing, or administering any instrument, substance, device, or other means with the purpose to terminate a pregnancy,” and the withdrawal of extraordinary life-maintenance measures on a brain-dead woman would not fall within its restrictions.

But this is the problem when you try to write a law into black and white, when you try to legislate what is right and what is wrong when dealing with decisions that are so personal, so intimate. Moral certainty sounds good, it may feel good, it may play well in a political campaign, but it cannot possibly make such hard choices from a distance. The law cannot act more wisely or with more love than would those who know the situation best.

This story first appeared in the Georgia Recorder, a member with the Phoenix in the nonprofit States Newsroom.

Florida Phoenix is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Michael Moline for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com.

The post Sponsor of Georgia abortion ban spared trauma of watching brain dead loved one carry fetus appeared first on floridaphoenix.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This article presents a clear critical stance toward Georgia’s anti-abortion law, emphasizing the emotional and ethical complexity of the case involving Adriana Smith. The tone sympathizes with the family’s distress and questions the law’s rigid application, portraying it as legally cautious but lacking in humanity. The coverage highlights the personal suffering and medical uncertainties while framing the law as overreaching and legally problematic. Although it includes quotes from a proponent of the law and the Attorney General, the framing and emphasis suggest a Center-Left bias by prioritizing personal autonomy, medical ethics, and critique of restrictive legislation.