AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
AP REPORT: HOSPITALS DENY EMERGENCY CARE TO PREGNANT WOMEN IN CRISIS
We are sharing this today as the U.S. Supreme Court hears a case challenging a federal law, EMTLA. The law requires hospitals to treat patients in crisis – including those in need of abortion services.
——
An astounding new @apnews article by Amanda Seitz reveals how harsh abortion bans have intimidated many hospitals and emergency rooms into denying emergency care to pregnant women in crisis.
Seitz shares the stories of women who were denied care, who lost their pregnancy in stillbirth, and were forced to suffer needless pain and indignity because healthcare professionals feared prosecution under abortion bans. And the AP reports that since the overturn of Roe, there’s been a spike in complaints that pregnant women have been turned away from emergency rooms — even though federal law requires ERs to treat patients in critical condition and/or active labor.
The federal law that requires that is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act. EMTALA will go before SCOTUS Wednesday as the Biden administration argues that, under EMTALA, Idaho’s strict ban on abortion even in emergencies is illegal.
Jennifer Klein, director of the White House Gender Policy Council @genderpolicycouncil46 said in a statement that “all patients, including women who are experiencing pregnancy-related emergencies, should have access to emergency medical care required” under EMTALA.
If the Court sides with the Biden admin, Idaho (and other states) must provide abortion services for women in medical emergencies. If SCOTUS finds for Idaho, women in Idaho will have to go to different states to receive reproductive care including in acute emergencies when every minute they’re denied care could be life changing.
Do you think people in your world are aware of the stakes here? Would they be surprised that the Dobbs ruling is putting basic care and women’s lives at risk like this? What is happening in your state to protect women?
Please comment and share this.
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
A new lawsuit alleges that groups helping to organize and fund some of the student protests have ties to Hamas.
Please read the whole carousel for context and more information. There is no allegation that student protesters are aware of any such ties. And any of these claims would have to be proven in court. I link to the lawsuit in stories.
Going forward I will share public comment from the groups implicated by and named in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit has far more detail than I shared here. Please read the lawsuit – it’s available to the public, filed in U.S. district Court for the Eastern District of Columbia. It’s filed by a highly reputable lawfirm.
#####
Huge props to @juliaboorstin and @secraimondo @cnbc #cnbcchangemakersfor putting this issue front and center. Hard to believe it needs this much explanation in 2024 but…it does.
Here Gina Raimondo, U.S. Secretary of Commerce, pushed for CHIPS Act funding for semiconductor plants to be tied to plans from CEOs to provide employees access to child-care services.
Raimondo said at CNBC’s inaugural Changemakers Summit on Thursday in New York that any person, politician, CEO or otherwise, who says child-care policy is social policy is “deeply misguided.”
Jessica Chang, founder and CEO of Upwards, which provides access to child-care benefits and services to Amazon, the U.S. Army and other corporate and government clients, pointed in a separate Changemakers’ session to a recent Boston Consulting Group study that reports the return on investment from child care has been measured at between 90% and 425%.
Note: she’s not saying businesses need to provide child care. Nor is this an economy wide mandate. Her dept is giving away billions to massive companies that make semiconductors, and she’s saying it you’re benefiting from all this public $$, your company needs to have plans in place that allow women workers to excel there too,
Per CNBC: Raimondo, who is overseeing a Commerce Department budget that has ballooned from a historical average of $10 billion to $150 billion.
Raimondo noted that half of Americans live in a “child care desert,” with not enough services available at a cost that is affordable.
“I’m trying to raise my voice that this is a commercial issue, not just a women’s issue or social issue,” said Raimondo, who will host a Commerce Department child care summit in June.
#cnbc #ginaraimondo #commerce #juliaboorstin
DOJ SETTLES NASSAR CASE
The DOJ reached a $137.8 million settlement with victims of Larry Nassar, convicted former Team USA gymnastics doctor. The victims had sued the government alleging the FBI failed to sufficiently investigate sexual assault accusations against Nassar when they were first reported, enabling Nassar to assault more women and girls in his care.
Nassar is convicted of sexually assaulting hundreds of patients and possessing child sexual abuse materials. This settlement resolves the final major suit in the Nassar case. Previously the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee and Michigan State University also made major payouts to hundreds of victims. With the DOJ settlement, institutions have collectively paid nearly $1 billion for complicity in Nassar’s abuse.
What do you think of the settlement? Tell us in the comments.
NEW MAMMOGRAM RULE, SAME MAMMOGRAM DISCOMFORT
A US government panel today lowered the recommended age for patients to begin regular mammograms from 50 to 40. This will hopefully catch breast cancer earlier in more patients, though some doctors say the rule didn’t go far enough.
While screening for breast cancer is critical, mammograms are frequently painful and many women report feeling that they are also demeaning. Not only that, mammograms are less effective for women with dense breast tissue (who are at higher risk for breast cancer) as the mammogram has a hard time “seeing through” this tissue to detect cancers. These women are often referred for additional screenings using ultrasound or MRI. This can require many expensive, painful, and disruptive follow-up appointments — which is not only an inconvenience that women are expected to accept but also extremely anxiety-inducing.
To be clear, follow the guidance and get your mammograms. Breast cancer screening saves lives. We do, however, wonder why this technology still hasn’t changed. When there are so many breakthroughs in other categories of medicine — can’t they develop a new less uncomfortable, dehumanizing screening process?
Anyone know what’s happening on this front or have thoughts?
MARIJUANA TO BE RECLASSIFIED
Cannabis advocates have been calling for the government to reclassify marijuana for years — thanks to the Biden administration, they may get their wish. The DEA is moving to reclassify marijuana as a Schedule III drug (like ketamine and some steroids) instead of a Schedule I drug (like heroin).
What does this really mean? First, it will remove many barriers to research, allowing more high-quality studies on the medical benefits (and costs) of marijuana use. Some of the logistics of this are still unclear.
It will also make it easier for marijuana dispensaries to write off business expenses on their taxes.
The move would not legalize recreational marijuana use nor make any immediate impact on people who have been jailed for marijuana charges.
The reclassification won’t take effect immediately — it requires a budget review, public-comment process, and administrative review.
What do you think of reclassifying marijuana?
WEINSTEIN NY RAPE CONVICTION OVERTURNED
A New York appeals court has overturned Harvey Weinstein’s conviction for sexual assault. New York prosecutors will have to decide whether to retry him. Ge has been serving a 22 year sentence in New York. He remains in jail on separate conviction in California, where he’s serving a 16 year prison term. He is 72.
The appeals court ruled 4-3 that, “We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes,” and “The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.” In other words, they objected to the trial judges’ decision to allow testimony from other women who say Weinstein attacked them, too, but whose claims were never proven in court.
A lawyer for a number of Weinstein’s accusers says this is a double standard for sexual assault, since unproven past acts are allowed to be presented in court routinely for other types of cases
One judge, Madeline Singas, wrote in her dissent that that “The majority’s determination perpetuates outdated notions of sexual violence and allows predators to escape accountability.” She argued that this ruling continues a “disturbing trend of overturning juries’ guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.”
Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction was also
thrown out.
What are your thoughts: is this the justice system working?
Is this a backlash to MeToo?
Are these two isolated cases and we shouldn’t draw conclusion?
Should prosecutors retry him?
Should witnesses testify again?
What a world.
BIDEN SIGNS TIKTOK BAN
President Biden today signed a bill that gives TikTok’s parent company ByteDance 9 months to sell TikTok or face a ban. The ban was bundled with crucial military aid for US allies.
ByteDance is expected to challenge the ban in court. Even if the ban is upheld, it’s likely to take longer than 9 months for TikTok to change hands or disappear from our phones. Regardless, TikTok is still here for at least that long — including during the 2024 election.
Elected officials and national security personnel have said TikTok is a national security threat and alleged the Chinese Communist Party uses TikTok to collect US user data and to interfere with US elections. TikTok denies these allegations.
What do you think of the TikTok ban? Tell us in comments.
VOTING INFRASTRUCTURE – SAFE AND UP TO DATE?
Would you pay $2.50 to secure our elections?
Functioning democracy relies on functioning elections — and that means safe and secure voting machines, secure voting facilities, and sufficient trained poll workers.
The Election Infrastructure Initiative says Congress should invest $400 million this year to protect democracy by investing in election infrastructure. On a Congressional scale, that’s hardly any money — roughly $2.50 per registered voter in the US. But Congress hasn’t approved that money yet, despite what seems like constant alarmism over election fraud.
Remember as a voter you have tools to let your elected official know what’s important to you. You can call and tell them.
Do you think Congress should allocate this funding? Comment and share this reel.