The New Yorker drew criticism Thursday after promoting an essay that called the distinction between being pregnant and not pregnant “misleading.” The magazine’s framing suggested a woman could instead be “kind of pregnant” or “a little bit pregnant.”

Written by Apoorva Tadepalli, “The Unsettling Ambiguity of Early Pregnancy” examined the uncertainty surrounding early pregnancy tests, miscarriage and viability. Tadepalli drew on her experiences with multiple pregnancy losses and her current pregnancy.

The New Yorker promoted the essay on X by saying home tests capture only a moment when an embryo has implanted. Its post said someone could be “kind of pregnant, a little bit pregnant, or almost pregnant, or maybe pregnant” while continuing to test positive.

The article focused heavily on what testing can reveal during the earliest stages of pregnancy and what remains unknown. Critics, however, argued that uncertainty about whether a pregnancy will remain viable does not make pregnancy itself a subjective or partial condition.

Los Angeles County Republican Party Chair Roxanne Hoge, a mother of four, said that doubts about viability do not change whether a woman is pregnant. She also expressed sympathy for Tadepalli’s experience of carrying a pregnancy after a loss.

“As a mother of four and an actual biological woman, I must applaud the author for noticing that women do, in fact, make babies,” Hoge said. “While I sympathize with her on the very sad reality of carrying a pregnancy after a loss, this was a lot of words to try and pretend that a fetus is a clump of cells. You're either pregnant or you're not.”

Elizabeth Barcohana, America First Policy Institute California ambassador to the America First Women's initiative, said the relevant distinction is between the existence of a pregnancy and whether a woman knows it is viable. Her response challenged the magazine’s presentation while separating pregnancy from its possible outcome.

“A woman cannot be ‘a little bit pregnant.’ Pregnancy is a physical, biological state that begins when a fertilized embryo implants in the uterus and triggers a chemical hormonal reaction,” Barcohana said Thursday in a statement. “This article is not about being pregnant. It is about a woman’s experience about knowing whether she is carrying a viable healthy pregnancy.”

Tadepalli described testing positive during five pregnancies and then enduring periods of uncertainty over whether she would miscarry. She said those experiences affected her ability to embrace her current pregnancy emotionally, while much of the essay considered the limits of early testing.

Lisa Cusack, president of the Don’t L.A. My Burbank PAC, also criticized the article’s framing. She viewed it as an attempt to make pregnancy more subjective and argued that uncertainty in early testing does not alter whether a woman is pregnant.

“Women have always known that early pregnancies sometimes don’t take or show up on tests, but that doesn’t change the fact that you’re either pregnant or not, whether you know it or not or want it or not,” Cusack said.

Barcohana said the essay addressed an experience that could be relatable to women who have suffered pregnancy loss. She blamed The New Yorker’s provocative presentation for pulling attention away from the legitimate concerns raised about unreliable early testing.

“The New Yorker’s editors betrayed the author with this provocative headline, because what she’s really talking about — in a vulnerable way that millions of women can empathize with — is the utility and impact on women of unreliable early testing,” Barcohana said. “She tried to talk about something totally legitimate for women trying to start a family, and they [editors] hijacked it.”

Medical guidance also distinguishes between detecting a pregnancy and assessing whether that pregnancy is viable. The Food and Drug Administration says home pregnancy tests detect human chorionic gonadotropin, or hCG, a hormone produced after a fertilized egg attaches to the uterine wall.

The agency notes that testing too early can produce inaccurate results and that a positive home test does not reveal how a pregnancy will develop. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states that pregnancy begins when a fertilized egg implants in the uterus, while viability can require further evaluation as development progresses.