|
Post by Webster on Feb 23, 2024 22:35:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Feb 27, 2024 17:06:23 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Senate Democrats push to protect IVF access after Alabama supreme court ruling curbing careSenate Democrats will seek passage of legislation to protect access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) care, after Alabama’s supreme court earlier this month determined that embryos used in the procedure are “children” and providers in the state stopped seeing patients. In a speech at the Capitol, Illinois’s Democratic senator Tammy Duckworth spoke of her own experience with using IVF to start a family. “My infertility would become one of the most heartbreaking struggles of my life, my miscarriage more painful than any wound I ever earned on the battlefield,” said Duckworth, who lost both of her legs while serving with the US army in Iraq. “So, it’s a little personal to me when a majority male court suggests that people like me, who are not able to have kids without the help of modern medicine, should be in jail cells and not taking care of their babies in nurseries.” She went on to blame Republicans who orchestrated the overturning of Roe v Wade for the ruling against IVF: I know I’m not alone when I struggled to understand how politicians who support this kind of policy can possibly call themselves pro- life. After Roe v Wade was overturned, actually, even before then, when Donald Trump promised to only appoint justices who would overturn it, I warned that red states would come for IVF, and now they have. But they aren’t going to stop in Alabama. Mark my words: if we don’t act now, it will only get worse.Duckworth said she will tomorrow ask the Senate to pass the Access to Family Building Act, which will protect IVF care, by unanimous consent – meaning all senators must agree. It’s unclear if it has the support to pass.
Speaking after Tammy Duckworth was Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s Democratic leader, who argued that Donald Trump’s appointment of conservative justices to the supreme court set the stage for the Alabama ruling against IVF. Democrats have performed well in state-level and special elections ever since the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade in 2022, a decision supported by the three justices Trump nominated for the court. Here’s what Schumer had to say about the connection between that decision and the ruling earlier this month in Alabama: This didn’t happen in a vacuum. What happened in Alabama, make no mistake about it, is a direct consequence of the hard-right Maga supreme court’s decision to overturn Roe v Wade. And, as sure as we’re standing here, there are going to be other awful decisions that emanate from this overturning of Roe v Wade, in the future. Thanks to Maga extremism, and the hard-right judges, the extremist judges that former President Trump and the Republican Senate put on the courts, today the United States is an embarrassment to the world when it comes to reproductive freedom.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Feb 27, 2024 17:09:20 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The fallout from Alabama’s supreme court ruling against IVF has reached neighboring Florida, where the Republican-dominated state legislature is delaying its push to pass a “fetal personhood” bill, the Guardian Gloria Oladipo reports: Florida lawmakers have postponed a bill that would give fetuses civil rights after a similar ruling in Alabama has halted in vitro fertilization treatment at several clinics in the state.
The “fetal personhood” bill had been gaining support amid Florida’s mostly Republican lawmakers. The legislation attempts to define a fetus as an “unborn child”, allowing parents to collect financial damages in the case of wrongful death, the Tampa Bay Times reported.
But the bill has largely stalled after Democrats argued that the legislation could affect in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments, as seen in Alabama after the state’s supreme court ruled earlier this month that embryos created through IVF are considered “extrauterine children”. Since the ruling, several Alabama IVF clinics have paused services.
The Florida state representative Dotie Joseph, a Democrat, told the Washington Post that the bill’s language did not protect IVF treatment from being affected.
“We are exposing the healthcare provider to liability if something goes wrong,” Joseph said. “You have a situation where you are creating a chilling effect for people who are proactively trying to have a baby.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Feb 28, 2024 13:50:05 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Democrats on Wednesday are moving to push through the Senate a bill that would protect Americans’ access to in vitro fertilization after an Alabama court ruled that frozen embryos are children, which led to the closure of a number of fertility clinics in the state. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Connecticut Democrat, said the bill was unlikely to receive unanimous consent from the chamber to rush the bill through. While many Republican lawmakers registered disappointment over the Alabama ruling, at least one conservative senator was expected to object. Blumenthal said Democrats would not be deterred. He would not say what the next legislative steps would be but he said Democrats, who control the Senate, would look for other ways to protect IVF and reproductive healthcare. “The IVF dilemma for Republicans is they are down a path that is not only unpopular, it’s untenable as a matter of constitutional law and basic moral imperative and we’re going to pursue it vigorously,” Blumenthal said. “Today’s vote, the effort to seek a unanimous consent, we know is unlikely to be successful. Failing today is only the prelude to a fight ahead on women’s reproductive care centered on IVF and other steps that have to be taken to protect basic rights.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Feb 29, 2024 17:38:31 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Alabama house passes bill to protect IVF providers following state supreme court rulingThe lower house of Alabama’s legislature has passed a law to protect providers of in vitro fertilization care, the Montgomery Advertiser reports, after the state supreme court earlier this month ruled embryos used in the procedure were “children”. The court’s decisions raised the possibility that practices providing the care, which is typically used by people who struggle to have children, could face civil suits or criminal prosecution. The bill, backed by the legislature’s Republican majority, would prevent that by protecting providers from those consequences. Here’s more, from the Advertiser: The Alabama state House passed overwhelmingly passed legislation Thursday granting civil and criminal immunity to in vitro fertilization patients and medical professionals.
The bill passed by a vote of 94-6.
Filed by Terri Collins, R-Morgan County, HB237 reaffirms Attorney General Steve Marshall’s statement that the state has ‘no intention of using the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision as a basis for prosecuting IVF families or providers.’
‘This would at least keep the clinics open and the families moving forward,’ Collins said.
The state Supreme Court in February ruled that frozen embryos are legally protected as children, a controversial decision that thrust the state into the national spotlight. The ruling has been condemned by both Democrats and Republicans.
In the wake of the court’s ruling, multiple clinics that offer IVF care in the state halted all appointments indefinitely, including Alabama Fertility and the University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 7, 2024 14:58:33 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Alabama governor signs IVF protection bill into lawAlabama lawmakers moved quickly to approve new legislation that to protect IVF providers from the fallout of a court ruling that found frozen embryos have the rights of children under the state’s wrongful death law. Alabama’s governor, Kay Ivey, signed the bill into law on Wednesday night. The law protects providers from lawsuits and criminal prosecution in the event of “damage or death of an embryo” during IVF services. In a statement after signing, Ivey, a Republican, said: IVF is a complex issue, no doubt, and I anticipate there will be more work to come, but right now, I am confident that this legislation will provide the assurances our IVF clinics need and will lead them to resume services immediately.The bill gives legal protection for fertility clinics, at least three of which paused IVF treatments after the state’s supreme court ruled last month that three couples who had frozen embryos destroyed in an accident at a storage facility could pursue wrongful death lawsuits.
Some Alabama fertility clinics that paused IVF services last month have said they will resume services after state lawmakers approved new legislation to protect IVF providers from potential civil and criminal liability. The bill “provides the protections that we need to start care – or resume care, really,” Dr Janet Bouknight, an IVF provider at Alabama Fertility, told NBC News. The clinic is planning to resume services this week. The state’s largest health care system, the University of Alabama at Birmingham, also said it would restart IVF services. In a video statement, Dr Warner Huh, chair of the UAB department of obstetrics and gynaecology, said: While UAB is moving to promptly resume IVF treatments, we’ll continue to assess developments and advocate for protections for IVF patients and our providers.Republicans in the state legislature proposed the immunity bill as a way to get clinics reopened, but have refused to take up a bill that would address the legal status of embryos. For that reason, some legal experts and reproductive rights advocates have warned the bill does not go far enough. Barbara Collura, president of Resolve: The National Infertility Association, said in a statement on Wednesday evening: While we are grateful for the actions of Alabama legislators, this legislation does not address the underlying issue of the status of embryos as part of the IVF process – threatening the long-term standard of care for IVF patients. There is more work to be done.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 7, 2024 15:04:17 GMT -5
(The Guardian) ‘Pandora’s box was opened’ after fall of Roe, says health secretaryThe health and human services secretary, Xavier Becerra, said the US must provide federal protections for reproductive rights if Americans hope to avoid further restrictions on in vitro fertilization, contraception and abortion in an exclusive interview with the Guardian. Becerra’s comments come in the wake of an Alabama supreme court decision that gave embryos the rights of “extrauterine children” and forced three of the state’s largest fertility clinics to stop services for fear of litigation and prosecution. He said the events in Alabama were linked directly to the “take-down” of Roe v Wade, a decision that provided a constitutional right to abortion grounded in privacy and was overturned by conservative US supreme court justices in 2022. Becerra said: It wasn’t until this new court came in” – that is, that three new supreme court justices were confirmed by former President Trump – “that we saw the attacks on Roe v Wade take hold, and today without Roe v Wade there are women who are trying to have babies in Alabama who are facing the consequences.He continued: None of this would be happening in Alabama on IVF if Roe v Wade was still the law of the land, and no one should try to deny that.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 7, 2024 18:05:36 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The American Society for Reproductive Medicine, which represents IVF providers nationwide, has said the new law is insufficient because it does not correct the fundamental problem – the court ruling that considers fertilized eggs to be children. The bill “falls far short of what Alabamans want and need to access fertility care in their state without fear,” NBC cited Karla Torres, senior counsel at the Center for Reproductive Rights, as saying, adding that the legislation amounted to “backpedaling in the face of state and nationwide public outcry to allow politicians to save face.” Although some of the clinics that paused IVF services after the state court’s decision are planning to resume treatments, the fertility clinic at the center of that case, the Center for Reproductive Medicine at Mobile Infirmary, said it will not yet be resuming IVF treatments, CNN reported. A statement said: At this time, we believe the law falls short of addressing the fertilized eggs currently stored across the state and leaves challenges for physicians and fertility clinics trying to help deserving families have children of their own.Alabama’s governor, Kay Ivey, acknowledged the new law was a quick fix after the court ruling and noted “there will be more work to come” on IVF protections.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 7, 2024 18:06:58 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Kate Cox, the Texas woman who had to flee her state for an abortion, has described the “terrifying” toll that politicizing health decisions takes on women and families. Cox, who is expected to attend this evening’s State of the Union address as a guest of first lady Jill Biden, sued Texas after the state supreme court ruled to block her from receiving an abortion after her foetus was diagnosed with a fatal chromosomal condition. Cox did not qualify for an abortion because her doctor did not establish her symptoms were life-threatening, the court ruled, prompting her to travel to New Mexico to undergo an abortion. Having to seek the procedure out of state “added a lot of pain and suffering to what was already the most devastating time of our lives,” she said in an interview with CNN aired last night. “I’m just one,” she said, adding: There’s a lot of women and families that are suffering because of the laws in Texas today.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 7, 2024 18:15:01 GMT -5
(The Guardian) More than a quarter of Black female voters describe abortion has their top issue in this year’s presidential election, according to a new poll. The findings by health policy research firm KFF reveal a significant shift from previous election years, when white, conservative evangelicals were more likely to put abortion as their biggest priority when voting, AP reported. Those voters were highly motivated in recent presidential elections to cast ballots for Donald Trump. Overall, 12% of voters surveyed said abortion was the most important issue in this year’s election. Twenty eight percent of Black women identified the issue as top of mind, as well as 19% of women living in states where abortion is banned, and 17% of women who are under age 50. Of voters who said that abortion was their most important issue, two-thirds said they believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases. “It’s a complete shift,” pollster Ashley Kirzinger told AP. -- Abortion voters are young, Black women – and not white evangelicals.Women – and Black women, in particular – were crucial to Joe Biden’s win over Trump in the 2020 presidential election. More than half of Black Americans live in southern states, most of which have introduced strict abortion laws since the supreme court overturned Roe v. Wade.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 14, 2024 15:06:45 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Harris to visit abortion clinic in MinnesotaKamala Harris today will visit a Planned Parenthood clinic in Minnesota that provides abortion services, marking the first time a president or vice president has been to a reproductive health clinic, according to her office. Harris’s trip to the Twin Cities is part of a nationwide tour she began in January to draw attention to the fallout after the reversal of Roe v Wade, and comes as Democrats play up their opposition to the rollback of reproductive rights ahead of the November election. Harris, the first woman elected vice-president, has emerged as the administration’s most vocal and prominent defender of abortion access. She has pointedly attacked Donald Trump for saying he was “proud” of helping to limit abortions, and blasted Republicans as extremists while pledging to push for federal legislation to restore the federal right to abortions.
Kamala Harris is expected to visit a clinic in the Minneapolis-St Paul area during operating hours today. Her office declined to identify the facility before she arrives there, citing security reasons. The center provides a range of services, including abortion, birth control and preventive wellness care. The vice president was scheduled to tour the facility, speak with staff and be briefed on how Minnesota has been affected by abortion bans in surrounding states. She will also talk about what the Biden administration has done to protect reproductive rights, her office said. She also was scheduled to speak at a Biden-Harris campaign event tailored to women.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 19, 2024 17:25:41 GMT -5
(The Guardian) An Arizona lawmaker announced on Monday on the state senate floor that she plans to have an abortion after learning that her pregnancy is not viable, the Associated Press writes. State senator Eva Burch, a registered nurse known for her reproductive rights activism, was surrounded by fellow Democratic senators as she made the announcement, the Arizona Republic reported and the AP brings us via news wire. Burch said that she found out a few weeks ago that “against all odds”, she was pregnant. The mother of two living children from west Mesa who is running for re-election said she has had “a rough journey” with fertility. She experienced her first miscarriage 13 years ago, was pregnant many times and terminated a nonviable pregnancy as she campaigned for her senate seat two years ago, she said. Now, Burch said that her current pregnancy was not progressing and not viable and she had made an appointment to terminate. -- I don’t think people should have to justify their abortions. But I’m choosing to talk about why I made this decision because I want us to be able to have meaningful conversations about the reality of how the work that we do in this body impacts people in the real world.”Burch said the state’s laws have “interfered” with her decision. Arizona law required an “invasive” transvaginal ultrasound that her doctor didn’t order and she was then read “factually false” information about alternatives that was required by law, she said. -- I’m a perfect example of why this relationship should be between patients and providers,” not state lawmakers,” Burch said.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 26, 2024 14:12:48 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Supreme court to weigh conservative challenge to key abortion pill mifepristoneNearly two years after overturning Roe v Wade and allowing states to ban abortion, the supreme court will today at 10am ET hear arguments in a case that could limit the availability of the abortion pill mifepristone. It’s the first time the justices will address reproductive rights since the Dobbs decision in 2022, and will be argued before a court that is ideologically quite similar to the one that decided that case. Conservative justices, including the same five who voted to strike down Roe, dominate the court with a six-seat majority, while liberals hold a three-seat minority. The arguments come as evidence emerges that usage of abortion medication has soared among Americans. A decision limiting access to mifepristone could also cause tumult in the presidential race, and is sure to be seized on by Joe Biden to argue that it’s a sign of what Donald Trump would do if put back in the White House. Trump did, after all, appoint three justices to the court and tip it decisively to the conservatives – all of whom voted to overturn Roe.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 26, 2024 14:28:36 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Ruling tightening mifepristone access could upend US pharmaceutical industryIt’s not just access to medication abortion that could be upended by a supreme court ruling tightening access to mifepristone. As the Guardian’s Jessica Glenza reports, the conservative challengers to the drug have targeted decisions made by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to make it easier to prescribe. But if the supreme court agrees with their complaint, it opens up the possibility of a wave of challenges to other medications that treat a range of issues. Doctors and pharmaceutical companies have become so concerned about the case that they have filed briefs defending the FDA against the conservative challenge. Here’s more on why the stakes in the case are so high: A supreme court case about one little pill – mifepristone – has the medical and pharmaceutical world on edge. The pill, at the heart of a case that will be argued on Tuesday, is part of a two-drug regimen used to treat miscarriage and end early pregnancies.
Despite a more than 20-year track record of safe real-world use, backed up by more than 100 peer-reviewed studies, a group of anti-abortion doctors is seeking to roll back US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decisions that changed and relaxed some prescribing rules.
If the doctors succeed, despite contested and in some cases now-retracted evidence of harm, the case could reshape abortion access in the US and have enormous and unpredictable consequences for how drugs are prescribed, regulated and developed.
A ruling in favor of anti-abortion doctors could threaten everything from trust in medicine to specific drugs to the US’s position as the world’s foremost drug innovator.
“I am terrified,” said Juan Hincapie-Castillo, a drug policy researcher, licensed pharmacist and assistant professor of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina. “This case is shifting the whole paradigm of how things could go moving forward”.
Mifepristone was approved by the FDA in 2000 with stringent requirements for how it should be prescribed: only up to seven weeks gestation, dispensed in-person with mandatory follow-up appointments, and with enhanced risk-reporting requirements for doctors. Along with misoprostol, the second drug in the regimen, it is, in effect, designed to induce the equivalent of a miscarriage at home.
After more than 20 years and scientific articles spanning 26 countries, the scientific consensus is that the “abortion pill” has a remarkable track record of safety and effectiveness that, in the media, is often compared to that of Tylenol or Viagra. But following the fall of Roe v Wade in 2022, anti-abortion doctors initiated a lawsuit against the FDA in Amarillo, Texas, arguing that the drug’s approval should be withdrawn. The Trump-appointed judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled in favor of the doctors. Were his decision not appealed, it would have resulted in a de facto nationwide ban on medication abortion.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Mar 26, 2024 14:32:47 GMT -5
|
|