LANSING, Mich. — Senator Gary Peters of Michigan shared his personal experience with abortion in a gut-wrenching interview with Elle on Monday, which also marked the first day of Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s Senate confirmation hearings.

Peters, who is running for reelection this year, discussed his first wife, Heidi, having a life-saving abortion in the 1980s, which the senator said occurred during their second pregnancy with a child that was very much wanted. 

It’s a story, Peters says, that all too many Americans can share. 

“It’s important for folks to understand that these things happen to folks every day,” he explains to Elle. “I’ve always considered myself pro-choice and believe women should be able to make these decisions themselves, but when you live it in real life, you realize the significant impact it can have on a family.”

At the time, Heidi was four months along when her water broke, leaving the baby with no amniotic fluid — an unsurvivable condition for a fetus. Physicians told the Peters to go home and wait for a natural miscarriage, the senator told Elle. 

But a day went by, and nothing happened. When the couple returned to the hospital, Peters said, a faint heartbeat was still detectable, and doctors encouraged Heidi to get an abortion — a procedure banned under hospital policy. 

Again, the Peters went home to wait. 

“The mental anguish someone goes through is intense, trying to have a miscarriage for a child that was wanted,” Peters told Elle. 

After a third day with no natural miscarriage, doctors warned the couple that Heidi’s health was in jeopardy. If she didn’t have an abortion as soon as possible, doctors told the Peters, Heidi could become septic and lost her uterus, or even die. 

Still, the hospital would not authorize an exception for the procedure, and encouraged the couple to seek help elsewhere. 

“I still vividly remember he left a message on the answering machine saying, ‘They refused to give me permission, not based on good medical practice, simply based on politics. I recommend you immediately find another physician who can do this procedure quickly,’” Peters recalled to Elle.

Ultimately, the couple were able to get the life-saving abortion through another hospital because of their connections with the chief administrator. But Heidi called the entire experience “painful and traumatic,” writing in a statement to Elle: “If it weren’t for urgent and critical medical care, I could have lost my life.”

Peters’ interview makes him the first sitting senator in United States history to openly discuss their experience with abortion. Three House representatives — California’s Barbara Lee and Jackie Speier, as well as Washington’s Pramila Jayapal — are the only other members of congress who have shared their own accounts of the procedure.

As personal and moving as the story may be, Peters also specifically chose a poignant date to reveal his experience: The story was released the same day as Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s pick to fill the Supreme Court vacancy, began her Senate confirmation hearings. 

Democrats are concerned about the future of Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision from 1973 that protects a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion without excessive government interference, should Barrett be confirmed, as her judicial record has shown her to be a staunch opponent of abortion.

The possibility is not lost on Peters — which is exactly why he decided to tell his story when he did.

“It’s important for folks who are willing to tell these stories to tell them, especially now,” Peters told Elle. “The new Supreme Court nominee could make a decision that will have major ramifications for reproductive health for women for decades to come. This is a pivotal moment for reproductive freedom.”

It was a potentially risky move for Peters, a first-term senator in a competitive race for reelection. Peters is one of two senators running for reelection in a state won by President Trump in 2016.

Peters’ opponent, John James, is a staunch pro-life advocate, even referring to abortions as “genocide” during his 2018 senate campaign, according to audio released by the Michigan Democratic Party. 

In an Oct. 4 interview with WXYZ-TV Detroit, James said, “I am pro-life and I will always vote to protect life, especially the life of the mother.” He would not clarify if the life of the mother would be cause for an exception to his anti-abortion views. 

James and Peters also hold opposing views on whether Barrett should be confirmed by the Senate. 

Peters has vowed to vote against confirming Barrett, writing in a Sept. 26 statement that the stakes of the vacancy “couldn’t be higher,” noting the high court will hear a Republican-led case seeking to throw out the Affordable Care Act a week after the election. Abortion rights, civil rights, voting rights and workers’ rights “are on the line,” he said.

“Michiganders have already started voting and with Election Day 38 days away — they deserve to have a say in who nominates and confirms the next Supreme Court justice,” the statement continued. “As I have said before, I do not support the Senate moving forward on a Supreme Court nomination until after Inauguration Day. I will vote against confirming Judge Amy Coney Barrett to a lifetime appointment on our nation’s highest court.” 

James, on the other hand, has slammed Peters for attempting to block the nomination, citing his opponent’s alleged “flip-flopped” opinion on appointing SCOTUS nominees during an election year — in 2016, Peters said that the Senate had a “constitutional responsibility” to consider the president’s nominees in regards to then-President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.

“This is exactly the opposite of what he said in 2016 when he said that President Obama should have his election year nominee,” James told Fox News in September of Peters’ refusal to confirm Barrett. “Now he's changing his tune because Chuck Schumer told him to. I support the constitution of the United States  and there's no small print that says political convenience should override what the constitution says.”

James has previously accused Peters of only supporting nominees from Democratic presidents and always opposing those of Republican presidents. He called for a return to a time when nominees like Ginsburg were confirmed with 96 votes. He said that if he is elected, he “will fairly and honestly evaluate every Supreme Court nominee, regardless of which political party nominates.”

Democrats said James cannot be trusted to be an independent voice for Michigan, pointing to comments he made to WZZM-TV in June in which he said that his past “2,000%” support for Trump was specifically for appointing “textualist” Supreme Court justices and “repatriating jobs.”

“It’s no surprise that John James is trying to hide his real position from Michiganders — it’s the playbook he’s used the entire campaign whether it’s his ‘2000%’ support for Trump or his support for repealing the health care law that protects 1.7 million Michiganders with preexisting conditions,” said Peters campaign spokeswoman Vanessa Valdivia.

James has said he supports repealing the law but wants to keep intact coverage of preexisting conditions. He has not specified how he would replace the Obama-era law.

Barrett’s confirmation hearings began Monday, Oct. 12, and are set to continue through Thursday.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.