Morning Briefing
Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations
Going Against Voters' Wishes, Kansas Advances Another Anti-Abortion Bill
AP: Voters Backed Abortion Rights. Yet Kansas Could Make Doctors Ask Patients Why They Want Abortions
Kansas moved closer Thursday to requiring abortion providers to ask patients why they want to terminate their pregnancies and report the answers to the state. It would join other states with Republican legislatures that ban most abortions even though Kansas voters have affirmed abortion rights. The House approved, in an 81-39 vote, a bill that would require providers to ask patients 11 questions about their reasons for terminating a pregnancy, including that they can’t afford another child, raising a child would hinder their education or careers, or a spouse or partner wanted her to have an abortion. The bill goes next to the state Senate, where it also is likely to pass. (Hanna, 3/7)
The Guardian: US Pharma Group Urges Supreme Court To Preserve FDA Power Over Abortion Pill But Also Paid Group Wanting Different Result
A top trade group for pharmaceutical companies has asked the US supreme court not to shred the power of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in an upcoming case that could cut access to a drug commonly used in abortions. But in a move that appears to undermine its own position, it has also given more than $125,000 to a GOP organization that backs the Republicans who want the supreme court to do exactly the opposite. (Sherman, 3/8)
The Boston Globe: Abortion Doulas Help Patients Navigate Hard Decisions Post-Dobbs
A growing network of advocates helps patients navigate the emotional, physical, and logistical journey of terminating a pregnancy. (Yarvis and Mohammed, 3/8)
CNN: Alabama Clinics Resume Treatment Under New IVF Law, But Experts Say It Will Take More Work To Protect Fertility Services
Providers in Alabama are resuming some in vitro fertilization services Thursday, the day after the state’s Republican governor signed a bill into law aimed at protecting IVF patients and providers from the legal liability imposed on them by a controversial state Supreme Court ruling. The new law does not address the issue of personhood at the heart of last month’s unprecedented ruling, which prompted some providers to halt some IVF services, and experts say it’s going to take more work to fully protect fertility services in the state. (Mascarenhas and Rosales, 3/7)
The Washington Post: Alabama IVF Ruling Draws Attention To Technology’s Unregulated Frontiers
Vitaly Kushnir’s fertility clinic offers to screen an embryo to predict a baby’s sex, but the service can lead to ethically murky territory, like when a couple wanted it so their first child could be a boy. It struck him as a sexist motive, he said, and initially he declined. But the couple pushed back, saying that they would simply abort the baby if it was a girl. “I’m not in the business of bringing in unwanted children,” said Kushnir, who owns West Coast Fertility Centers and teaches at the University of California at Irvine. Kushnir, who ultimately agreed to the couple’s wishes, said he thinks there should be some restrictions on selecting a baby’s sex, but in the United States, there aren’t any. (Gilbert, 3/7)
Stat: IVF Doctors Demand Details After CooperSurgical Lawsuit
Patients from all over the country are filing lawsuits against medical supply giant CooperSurgical, alleging that fluid the company sent to in vitro fertilization clinics destroyed their embryos. (Lawrence, 3/8)
