Washington Must Prosecute the Alleged Attempt to Force an Abortion
The Bellingham case shows how abortion drugs obtained in one person's name can be turned against a pregnant woman who refused an abortion—and the child she chose to keep.
Prosecutors should pursue every supported charge in the alleged attempt to force an abortion on a pregnant Bellingham woman. She declined an offer of money to end her pregnancy, according to a Bellingham Police affidavit reported by Whatcom News2. Court documents described by Cascadia Daily News accuse Jean Brando Zintz of trying four times over the spring to administer abortion pills to her1.
The affidavit says Zintz subsequently told her he supported the pregnancy and began buying prenatal supplements and capsules, insisting she take them2. That alleged turn—from an unwanted pregnancy to professed support—put what appeared to be help inside the mother's daily routine. She was entitled to accept support without surrendering control over her body or her child's life.
The pills were allegedly obtained in another name
The alleged mechanism began with a prescription obtained for someone else. The affidavit says Zintz's brother, Michael M. Montano, told the woman that Zintz paid Montano's girlfriend, Ciara L. Miller, to obtain prescription abortion medication in Miller's name2.
Montano alleged that Zintz put medication inside the woman's choline supplements and used sedatives so he could place abortion medication under her tongue or vaginally while she slept. Detectives later seized four 200-microgram tablets of Medoz misoprostol from a desk in Zintz's bedroom2.
A prescription bearing one woman's name cannot establish another woman's consent. That is the danger this allegation exposes: medication obtained through one person can allegedly be turned against a mother who never agreed to take it. The obligation to protect her cannot end when the prescription is filled.
Her choice and her baby were put at risk
A May 15, 2026, toxicology screening showed an unconfirmed positive result for benzodiazepines, which the woman said she had not knowingly taken. She received emergency-department treatment for low blood pressure on June 152.
Cascadia Daily News reported that she would wake during early pregnancy with a “white, chalky substance” in her mouth. The suspect told her she was drooling and should return to sleep1.
The probable-cause statement says the woman and her unborn baby are now healthy1. That welcome outcome does not lessen the alleged violation. A mother should not have to discover what someone put in her mouth to protect the child she chose to carry.
Washington law requires the woman’s consent
Washington law requires the woman's consent
Protecting that mother requires enforcing the consent requirement Washington already recognizes. My Bellingham Now reports that the state passed a law in 2025 protecting abortion access while requiring the pregnant woman's consent3.
Abortion access is the state's stated protection; consent is its stated condition. The latter cannot become an afterthought when a woman chooses to continue her pregnancy. What protection does consent provide if officials treat it as a concern only for the person whose name appears on the prescription?
Washington's leaders should defend a mother's refusal as firmly as they defend access to abortion. Her decision to carry her child deserves protection in practice, including against covert administration by another person.
Prosecutors must pursue every charge
Prosecutors must pursue every charge
Whatcom News reports that Zintz was arrested on probable cause for attempted first-degree manslaughter, second-degree assault and a felony domestic-violence order violation. Montano and Miller were each arrested on probable cause for complicity to attempted first-degree manslaughter and complicity to second-degree assault2.
Those are allegations to prove in court, and prosecutors should pursue each charge the evidence supports. The inquiry must follow the entire alleged chain: obtaining the medication, passing it along and administering it without consent.
Washington should also examine how its safeguards address prescriptions obtained in another person's name and diverted for coercion. Protect the mother who refuses abortion, protect her unborn child, and prosecute every supported charge.
Sources
FAMILY BRIEF The news and network for the American family.
