A tragic case has emerged from Greensboro, North Carolina, where a pregnant police officer, Ciji Graham, died after being unable to receive urgent medical treatment for a heart condition. On November 14, 2023, Graham, 34, was experiencing severe atrial fibrillation, with her heart racing at 192 beats per minute. Despite her critical condition, she was sent home without treatment due to her pregnancy, highlighting the growing challenges that women with chronic conditions face in a healthcare environment increasingly influenced by restrictive abortion laws.
Graham’s ordeal began when she visited a cardiologist who informed her that the standard procedure for her condition, cardioversion, could not be performed because of her pregnancy. Medical records indicate that she was advised to consult multiple specialists before returning in a week. “Said she can’t cardiovert being pregnant,” Graham texted a friend following her appointment, expressing her frustration and fear.
As reported by ProPublica, Graham’s case is not isolated. Numerous medical professionals have voiced concerns that the current legal landscape surrounding abortion has led to a denial of essential medical care for high-risk pregnant patients. Experts agree that cardioversion is generally considered safe during pregnancy, yet Graham was not admitted for immediate care.
The following day, Graham consulted a second cardiologist, Dr. Will Camnitz, who prescribed a blood thinner but did not perform an electrocardiogram to assess her heart rate. Medical professionals reviewing her case criticized this decision, noting that without further testing, Graham’s health remained precarious. “I can’t think of any situation where I would feel comfortable sending anyone home with a heart rate of 192,” commented Dr. Jenna Skowronski, a cardiologist at the University of North Carolina.
Graham believed that terminating her pregnancy was the best way to protect her health. However, due to stringent abortion restrictions, finding a doctor who could perform the procedure quickly became a daunting task. North Carolina law prohibits abortions after 12 weeks, and Graham, being approximately six weeks pregnant, faced an overwhelming wait for a procedure, exacerbated by an influx of patients from neighboring states with more severe restrictions.
In her struggle, Graham reached out to A Woman’s Choice, the only abortion clinic in Greensboro, but was informed that she would need to wait nearly two weeks for an appointment. The clinic stated that due to her heart condition, a hospital with more resources would have been more appropriate for her care. Most notably, Graham was unaware that an abortion at a hospital would be necessary.
In the U.S., the maternal mortality rate is alarmingly high compared to other wealthy nations, particularly in light of chronic conditions in pregnancy. Dr. Marian Knight, who leads the UK’s maternal mortality review program, highlighted that in countries like the UK, a coordinated care approach would have likely ensured Graham received the necessary treatment promptly, reducing the risk of complications.
On November 19, 2023, Graham was found unresponsive at her home. The official cause of death was determined to be cardiac arrhythmia due to atrial fibrillation in the context of her recent pregnancy. Her family expressed disbelief that had she received appropriate care, her life could have been saved.
Experts who reviewed Graham’s case emphasized that her death was preventable. “There were so many points where they could have intervened,” noted Dr. Amelia Huntsberger, a former member of Idaho’s maternal mortality review committee. This situation illustrates a growing concern among healthcare professionals about the legal implications of providing care to pregnant women in states with restrictive abortion laws.
Following her passing, Graham’s family held a candlelight vigil, attended by friends, colleagues, and community members whose lives she had touched. Her son, SJ, is left without a mother, and family members struggle to explain her death to him. The emotional toll of this tragic loss underscores the urgent need for reform in how healthcare systems approach high-risk pregnancies, particularly in light of the changing legal landscape regarding reproductive health.
As the healthcare community grapples with these issues, Graham’s case serves as a sobering reminder of the critical need for comprehensive care that prioritizes the health and safety of both mother and child.
