rePROs Fight Back – Détails, épisodes et analyse

 Next week, the Supreme Court term will begin. While there are no abortion cases on the docket yet, there are many cases that concern sexual and reproductive health, rights, and justice and the rights of the LGBTQI+ community. Jessica Mason Pieklo, Senior Vice President and Executive Editor at Rewire News Group and co-host of Rewire News Group's podcast Boom! Lawyered, sits down to talk with us about some cases that face SCOTUS this term, as well as potential cases to keep a careful eye on.  

United States v. Skrimetti, which will be before the Court this term, involves challenges to Kentucky and Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors, and whether those bans violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution. In addition, some cases that could make their way up the docket include a grouping of conservative attorneys general are attempting to bring back challenges to mifepristone access, Idaho’s resurrection of EMTALA challenges, and Oklahoma’s appeal to challenge the Biden administration on requirements for Title X funding. Lastly, a petition currently sits before the Supreme Court that could potentially end the case that green-lit wrongful death suits related to invitro fertilization in Alabama. 

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Economics and reproductive health and rights are connected issues. Especially in states where abortion is banned and contraception faces increasing attacks, associated costs for care can vary widely. Kate Bahn, Chief Economist and Senior Vice President of Research at the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, sits down to talk with us about the economic impacts of attacks to reproductive health and rights—on an individual, local, and national level.

Access (or lack thereof) to abortion and contraception can carry a host of indirect and direct financial consequences. Costs from traveling to access abortion, obtaining childcare, and booking lodging can impact how people make their reproductive choices. Individuals can also be financially impacted by unplanned fertility outcomes, such as having a child at a time when they were not planning to. To learn more, you can find our podcast episode on the Turnaway Study with Dr. Diana Greene Foster here. Other financial considerations should also be afforded to those undergoing invitro fertilization and navigating miscarriage. In addition, research shows that those who have access to contraception and abortion experience more flexibility and exploration in academic and professional opportunities. 

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

This week, we are doing things a little differently! We hear from advocates, medical providers, leaders, and researchers, who tell us about their strategies, reflections, hopes, and joys during the ongoing fight for sexual and reproductive health, rights, and justice.

Guests featured in this episode include: 

Jennie Wetter, Director of rePROs Fight Back

Dr. Monica McLemore, Professor of Child, Family, and Population Health Nursing at the University of Washington and Director of the Manning Price Spratlen Center for Anti-Racism and Equity in Nursing

Dr. Diane Horvath, OB/GYN and Co-Founder and Chief Medical Officer at Partners of Abortion Care

Beirne Roose-Snyder, Senior Policy Fellow at the Council for Global Equality

Greer Donley, Associate Professor with a reproductive rights focus at University of Pittsburgh Law School

Rev. Katey Zeh, CEO for the Religious Community for Reproductive Choice

Tarah Demant, National Director of Programs at Amnesty International 

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

“We believe that everyone who has abortions deserves unconditional love and support. We believe that people who have abortions deserve to be in every space where decisions are being made. To borrow from the disability justice movement, there should be nothing about us without us. We are the leaders we’ve been waiting for.” -We Testify.

For this incredibly special part two of our storytellers podcast series, tune in to hear the abortion stories of Kelsea McLain, Jack Qu’emi, and Veronika—abortion storytellers from We Testify.

Links

We Testify

Sign up to receive We Testify newsletters

We Testify on Twitter

We Testify on Facebook

Graphic artist Sage M Coffey 

Passing the Women’s Health Protection Act Would Be Magical 

Take Action

Follow We Testify on Facebook and Twitter to keep up-to-date on their essential work. You can also sign up to receive We Testify newsletters here. 

You can also to get involved with We Testify, find more abortion stories, or share your abortion story.

Love the episode art? Find more of graphic artist Sage M. Coffey’s work here!

The Senate will be voting on the Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) on February 28th. Call your Senators and tell them to support passing WHPA!! You can call the Senate Switchboard at (202) 224-3121

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

“We believe that everyone who has abortions deserves unconditional love and support. We believe that people who have abortions deserve to be in every space where decisions are being made. To borrow from the disability justice movement, there should be nothing about us without us. We are the leaders we’ve been waiting for.” -We Testify.

For this incredibly special part one of our storytellers podcast series, tune in to hear the abortion stories of Anna, Sarah Lopez, Nick, and Stephanie Gomez—abortion storytellers from We Testify.

Links

We Testify

Sign up to receive We Testify newsletters

We Testify on Twitter

We Testify on Facebook

Graphic artist Sage M Coffey 

Take Action

Follow We Testify on Facebook and Twitter to keep up-to-date on their essential work. You can also sign up to receive We Testify newsletters here. 

You can also to get involved with We Testify, find more abortion stories, or share your abortion story.

Love the episode art? Find more of graphic artist Sage M. Coffey’s work here!

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

When the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved mifepristone--the first of two drugs used in a medication abortion-- in 2000, the approval process came with a myriad of restrictions. Kirsten Moore, creator and director of the Expanding Medication Abortion Access (EMAA) Project, sits down to talk with us about the evolution of restrictions on medication abortion over the past 22 years, as well as the future of medication abortion access.

In the mid-2000s, these restrictions were folded into an FDA program called Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS). These restrictions included a certification process for the clinician, requires that the medication be dispensed in person in the clinic, hospital, or medical office, and patients must fill out a consent form. During the pandemic, the FDA issued guidance for medications subject to REMS, easing restrictions on providers and patients—but medications requiring in-person dispersal was not included. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) sued the FDA, leading to a short period of time in 2020 when providers were able to consult with patients and prescribe medication abortion care through telemedicine and the mail. In January of 2021, the Supreme Court shut these abilities down. Still, in spring of 2021, the FDA announced that they would re-consider the current REMS restrictions. In December of 2021, the FDA announced the removal of the in-person distribution requirement for mifepristone and allowing in-person and mail-order pharmacy distribution.

Unfortunately, expanded medication abortion access will, like many reproductive health services, be dependent on where you live. At this moment, 19 states prohibit the use of telehealth for abortion care (the number of states may rise to 26 depending on the future of Roe v. Wade). Many patients who are seeking an abortion are already facing structural, financial, and logistical barriers that make accessing this care extremely difficult to begin with. Even so, the FDA’s lifting of unnecessary restrictions on medication abortion dismantles one less barrier to care for many.

Links

The EMAA Project on Facebook

The EMAA Project on Twitter

Blog post- Supporting a Friend’s Abortion At Home

Take Action

Follow the EMAA project on Facebook and Twitter here.

Stay engaged in the fight to reduce barriers to medication abortion in individual states, and continue to talk about medication abortion as an option! Many people aren’t aware of it or know little about it, despite the fact that it’s an extremely safe and effective way of ending a pregn

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

The disability rights movement and reproductive rights movement both revolve around the ability to control one’s own body and life. Sam Crane, legal director at the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, talks to us about the disability rights movement’s long history of facing reproductive rights and reproductive autonomy restrictions, and why centering the experiences and voices of people with disabilities will increase access to basic reproductive healthcare.  

People with disabilities have encountered an extensive history of attacks on their reproductive health, rights and justice through the eugenics movement, forced sterilization, guardianship, and institutionalization. And, unfortunately, people with disabilities continue to experience unique and disproportionate barriers to accessing reproductive health care each day. For example, legal rights and protections do not necessarily offer meaningful support, which will address people of color, LGBTQ+ people, people with low-incomes, and people with disabilities more acutely (Roe v. Wade provides a theoretical right to abortion but does not address any logistical roadblocks to accessing care). 

Another barrier includes discrimination or stereotypes in healthcare settings (providers often do not ask people with disabilities about contraceptive options or abortion needs, and many people with disabilities may not trust healthcare providers due to the previously mentioned long history of attacks on reproductive health). Additionally, religious refusals prevent those with disabilities from attending healthcare appointments or taking contraception. There are also a variety of barriers those with disabilities face related to accessing reproductive healthcare. Many with disabilities rely on insurance coverage through Medicaid—but the Hyde amendment prevents federal dollars going toward coverage of abortion care. Lack of access to/ability to use transportation also prevents many from getting to the a healthcare provider. 

The ability for people with disabilities to not only be able to access reproductive healthcare, but be fully realized in their reproductive rights and bodily autonomy ties directly to the current state of reproductive health in the U.S. Any successful attack on Roe v. Wade will no doubt distinctively impact those who are the most marginalized. At all levels of government, policy must be passed that centers those with disabilities experiences accessing reproductive healthcare. At the federal level, applicable policy includes the EACH Act, the Women’s Health Protection Act, and the Home and Community-Based Services Access Act.

Links

Report: Access, Autonomy, and Dignity: A Series on Reproductive Rights and Disability Justice

A

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

 Reproductive rights and the rights of transgender individuals are issues that are deeply rooted in bodily autonomy and have been under constant assault for the past year (and many years before). Jessica Mason Pieklo, Senior Vice President and Executive Editor at Rewire News Group and co-host of the Boom! Lawyered podcast and Katelyn Burns, columnist for MSNBC, writer for Medium, and co-host of podcast Cancel Me Daddy, talk to us about the ways in which these two issues are intertwined as well as the importance of supporting reproductive rights and transgender rights as their own, incredibly important individual human rights concerns. 

 The same systems seek that seek to oppress transgender rights undoubtedly oppress reproductive rights, and vice versa. For example, the recent Texas abortion law, SB8, bans abortion at six weeks and empowers pseudo-vigilantism, allowing for the reporting of anyone who “aids and abets” someone in accessing an abortion for a financial incentive. Similarly, in 2015, a Texas state representative introduced a bill that would supply $2,000 bounties to those who turned in transgender students found in bathrooms.

 It’s also critical to remember, though, that reproductive rights and transgender rights should be able to stand strong as their own individual issues, and that both movement deserve support based on their own merits. In 2021, transgender rights faced a barrage of attacks. Most notably, conservative lawmakers have pushed legislation that would prevent transgender women and girls from competing in sports. Other bills attempted to ban trans adolescents from accessing gender-affirming medical care, such as puberty blockers. For abortion access, 2021 has been the most devastating year since before the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973. On top of the six-week ban passed by Texas and the multiple copycat bills popping up in state legislatures around the U.S., attacks on abortion access have accelerated greatly over the past year due to the extremely conservative make-up of the federal court system.

 Ceaseless assaults on transgender rights and reproductive rights point toward an exceptionally concerning direction that federal and state governments are headed—one that directly challenges basic human rights, bodily autonomy, and the safety, wellbeing, and health of so many across the country.

 Links

Jessica Mason Pieklo on Twitter
Katelyn Burns on Twitter

National Network of Abortion Funds map

Boom! Lawyered podcast

Cancel Me, Daddy podcast

Take Action

First, stay up-to-date on the newest writings about reproductive and transgender rights by following Rewire. News and Facebook and

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Rape and other forms of sexual violence have been reported by health workers, human rights observers, and civilians in conflict zones, including Rwanda, Bosnia, Tigray, and Myanmar. Yet, survivors of these human rights abuses are rarely provided the sexual and reproductive healthcare they need. Jill Filipovic, freelance journalist and author of The H Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness and OK Boomer: Let’s Talk How My Generation Got Left Behind, talks to us about how U.S. foreign policy has prevented the support and care of women who have endured sexual violence in conflict zones. 

U.S. foreign policy, such as the global gag rule and the Helms amendment, have prevented U.S. dollars to fund safe abortions for rape survivors and refugees even in areas where abortion is legal. In fact, the Helms amendment dictates that no U.S. funding can be spent on abortion as a method of family planning. Even though the Helms amendment’s wording should exclude abortions needed as a result of rape or abortion for those whose lives and health are threatened, U.S. federal dollars still do not fund safe abortion care. The global gag rule prevents U.S. funding for family planning abroad from going to groups that perform abortion with their own non-U.S. money, advocate for abortion, or refer people for abortion care. The rule has a broad “chilling effect”, stigmatizing the procedure and preventing groups that receive U.S. funding from engaging in abortion-related activities. While the Biden/Harris admin has rescinded the global gag rule it is not a light switch, just because the policy is gone it does not mean its impacts are. (Learn more about why we must permanently repeal the global gag rule by checking out this episode of rePROs Fight Back from earlier this year).  

As a result of U.S. law, many medical providers in conflict settings are able to offer post-abortion care—via the same medical machine or the same set of medications— but cannot offer an elective abortion, itself. Because women cannot access an elective abortion at the time needed, they may seek unsafe options and return to the medical provider for post-abortion care, after. This leads to increased rates of problems in pregnancy and childbirth, injury and death, loss of fertility, and more. Under the Trump administration, post-abortion care in conflict settings was scaled back, as well as radically expanded the global gag rule during the administration’s four years. 

Those who have experienced this trauma, which is rooted in a loss of control over one’s own physical safety and bodily autonomy, deserve control and ability to make personal decisions in the aftermath of a sexual assault. Ultimately, the U.S.’s policy must change to center the safety, health, and wellbeing of women and girls in conflict zones and to adhere to the principles outlined in the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda.

Take Action

 First and foremost, be sure to read Jill Filipo

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Note: This episode and the episode’s shownotes utilize the term “women,” when talking about the Turnaway study results, because women made up all of the participants. Many people, including trans men and non-binary individuals, still require access to safe and timely abortion care.

On December 1st, 2021, the Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments to Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—a 15-week abortion ban out of Mississippi, which will put the ability to access abortion care out of reach for so many. Dr. Diana Greene Foster, researcher at the University of California, San Francisco and author of the Turnaway Study: Ten Years, A Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having- or Being Denied- an Abortion, talks to us about her book on the study, the science and stories behind it, and why the upcoming Supreme Court case is a direct affront to reproductive health.

The Turnaway Study began in 2007 as a way to answer whether or not abortion hurts women—an idea that has impacted policy for decades and has even underlined the Supreme Court’s decision to ban one type of abortion. The study followed a diverse set of participants from 30 U.S. facilities, comparing the outcomes of those who received abortions as compared to those who wanted them but couldn’t get them. For five years, participants were interviewed on their physical health, mental health, socioeconomic wellbeing, and life outcomes. 

The study quickly found the opposite to be true; limiting access to abortion led to women experiencing significant risks to their physical health, financial health, and life outcomes. Medical literature has made clear that carrying a pregnancy to term is associated with much greater health risk than having an abortion, which was confirmed by the study. Tragically, two study participants died as a result of not being able to access an abortion, while many reported higher rates of chronic pain, hypertension, and short-term mental health concerns. Additionally, women denied abortion care were much more likely to end up living below the federal poverty level, more likely to receive public assistance, more likely to be in situations of domestic violence, and less likely to set and achieve aspirational plans. People who received their wanted abortion had a higher rate of later intended pregnancies—increasing the likelihood that, down the line, participants had wanted and healthier pregnancies with better partners, more support, and when they were ready. Finally, the children of mothers who received an abortion experienced better outcomes as well, with less likelihood of living in poverty, and increased likelihood of achieving developmental milestones. 

Links

The Turnaway Study: Ten Years, A Thousand Women, and the Consequences of Having- or Being Denied- and Abortion

Diana

For more information, check out Boom! Lawyered: https://rewirenewsgroup.com/boom-lawyered/ 

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Bluesky: @reprosfightback.bsky.social

Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!