Morning Briefing
Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations
Perspectives: Administration's New Rule Is No Way To Reduce Number Of Abortions; Americans Of Faith Need To Speak Out Against Setting Obstacles In Path To Abortion
WBUR: The Title X 'Gag Rule' Plays Politics By Attacking Women's Health
It puts clinicians in the untenable position of either violating medical ethics by withholding information from their patients, or being expelled from a federal program intended to ensure that people struggling to make ends meet can still access contraception, sexually transmitted disease testing, cancer screenings and other essential reproductive health care. By requiring clinics that offer abortions to maintain separate books and establish “physical separation” between abortion and any other medical services it provides (such as requiring separate entrances and exits, hiring separate staffs, etc.), this rule will make it physically and financially impossible for organizations receiving Title X funds for any reason to perform abortions. (Julie Wittes Schlack, 3/1)
The Hill: Why America's Faithful Must Stand Against The Domestic Gag Rule
The religious right in America hitched its wagon to President Trump to impose their beliefs on others and limit the health care people can and cannot receive. It began with President Trump’s first stroke of the pen reinstating and callously expanding the global gag rule. His policy withholds $9 billion in U.S. foreign assistance including, for the first time, almost $6 billion in HIV/AIDS relief — from organizations and governments around the world if they counsel or refer patients for abortion care, even if abortion is legal in their country. The result has drastically undermined the health of the world’s most vulnerable people. Now, President Trump and his ultraconservative allies are doing the same thing at home with a domestic gag rule. (Cynthia Romero and Jack Teter, 2/28)
Boston Globe: Abortion Goes On Trial, Again
The Supreme Court has turned a blind eye to these restrictive laws, using a vague legal test to judge a law’s constitutionality: Does the law impose an “undue burden” on a woman’s right to end her pregnancy before a fetus is viable or put her life or health at risk after that point? But with Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, the Roberts Court is now ready to test the limits of Roe v. Wade once again. (Robert L. Tsai, 2/28)
