rePROs Fight Back

After the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, and for many years before, Florida served as an abortion access point for many people in the South. But with changing judicial interpretation of “privacy” in the state, access to abortion in Florida has shifted. Laura Goodhue, Executive Director of Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, sits down to talk with us about the status of abortion access in Florida and the outcome of the state ballot initiative in the November 2024 election. 

After the passage of S.B. 8 in Texas and the overturning of Roe, clinics in the northern area of Florida saw a quadrupled number of patients coming in from out of state seeking care. In May 2024, Florida passed a 6-week abortion ban, which has drastically impacted access for both Floridians and those traveling for abortion care. This year’s ballot initiative was aimed at passing a citizen-led Constitutional amendment clarifying that abortion is a decision to be left to a doctor and patient. It passed by 57%; but the current rule in Florida requires a 60% majority vote for the initiative to pass, so it did not go into effect. Find more information on Florida’s Amendment 4 here.

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Power to Decide, a national nonprofit dedicated to advancing sexual and reproductive wellbeing for all, has launched a new survey initiative called the Youth Reproductive Health Access Survey. It aims to collect annual data on young people’s access to sexual and reproductive health services, with emphasis on contraception and abortion. Riley Steiner, Senior Director, Research and Evaluation at Power to Decide, sits down to talk to us about the survey’s findings—including information gaps, preferences, and service provision related to young people’s access to basic contraceptive care.

The survey’s data is collected online from approximately 1,000 young people ages 15-29, assigned female at birth. Power to Decide collected striking knowledge gaps and notable findings, including that a quarter of respondents indicated that they didn't have enough information to decide whether using birth control was the right thing for them and that a third of respondents indicated that they didn't have enough information to decide which birth control methods are right for them. Because there’s a noted lack of information and access, Power to Decide’s findings show that providers and advocates must think creatively to get young people the care they need. 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Today is already stressful as is—that’s why we thought it a perfect time for round 6 of our series, SRHR Hero Origin Stories! If you haven’t already, check out our previous episodes, SRHR Hero Origin Stories, SRHR Hero Origin Stories: Round 2, SRHR Hero Origin Stories: Round 3, SRHR Hero Origin Stories: Round 4, and SRHR Origin Stories: Round 5, where we talked to a number of amazing heroes in the field of reproductive health, rights, and justice about how they began working in this space. We hope you enjoy the reprisal of our most popular podcast episode, talking to leaders about their work, passions, and journeys into the field of reproductive health for a fifth time!

Guests include: 

Jennie Wetter – rePROs Fight Back

Shireen Rose Shakouri – Reproaction

Kate Kelly – Center for American Progress

Maniza Habib – Population Institute

Dázon Dixon Diallo – SisterLove, Inc

Sarah Craven – UNFPA 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

On election day, Arizonans can vote to amend the state Constitution to establish the fundamental right to abortion. This amendment, which would undoubtedly increase access to abortion care, is especially salient given that Arizona has become an abortion access battleground state since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022. Alex Gomez, Executive Director of LUCHA – Living United for Change in Arizona, sits down to talk to us about Proposition 139 and what its possible passage may mean for the future of abortion in the state. 

 Proposition 139, the Right to Abortion Initiative, would enshrine abortion access into the state constitution and conclude that Arizona may not interfere with an individual’s pregnancy before the point of fetal viability (the measure also protects access past fetal viability in cases of protecting the life, physical, or mental health of the pregnant person). In addition, the ballot initiative would prevent punitive laws aimed at people accessing abortion, or those assisting them. 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Disinformation around reproductive health and rights is highly strategic, leading to pervasive narratives that intentionally divide and control. Anneshia Hardy, scholar-activist, social impact entrepreneur, and narrative strategist, and Executive Director of both Alabama Values and Alabama Values Progress, sits down to talk to us about pervasive narratives and mis- and disinformation surrounding sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), particularly in the Black community, and how busting these narratives is crucial in the fight for bodily autonomy and liberation. 

This conversation is rooted in years of historical context. In the U.S., Black women have faced generations of exploitation and control over their bodies, and much of this exploitation and control exists to this day. Other birthing people, including Indigenous, Latinx, and Asian people, as well as people with disabilities, have also faced reproductive violence in the U.S. Some of the most marginalized communities are also unduly impacted by false narratives around SRHR, including: SRHR is separate from racial justice or only a “woman’s issue”; abortion bans are about “protecting babies,”; or abortion is a moral and religious imperative. Control over our bodies is fundamental to liberation, and these narratives not only impede—but disproportionately so—people’s ability to live freely. 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

From self-care advice to an imaginary performance on the Great British Bake Off, Rachel Fey, Vice President, Policy, and Strategic Partnerships at Power to Decide, asks our host Jennie Wetter a collection of ask me anything (AMA) questions!

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

Abortion is a human right—it’s outlined in international treaties and standards that apply to the United States. But even before Roe v. Wade was overturned, the United States was not meeting its human rights obligations. Tarah Demant, National Director of Programs at Amnesty International USA, sits down to talk with us about a new Amnesty report highlighting the status of U.S. abortion access since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court case that overturned Roe. 

Because of Dobbs, and in partnership with subsequent state-based abortion bans, millions of people are facing increased barriers to abortion care. These barriers are, and always have been, disproportionately faced by different populations and communities in the U.S. Some elements that are impacting access to care post-Roe include the logistical and financial costs of travel, in-person requirements, the rise in pregnancy criminalization, and the criminalization of medical professionals and advocates. With exceptions (which do not provide as much flexibility as made to seem) stacked on top of these cases, access is incredibly difficult to achieve. Learn more in the Amnesty International USA report, accessible in the links section below.

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

The Global Gag Rule (GGR) prevents foreign non-governmental organizations that receive U.S. foreign assistance funds from providing, advocating for, counseling on, or referring for abortion services—and has successfully done so for 40 years. Beirne Roose-Snyder, Senior Director at the Preclusion Project, and Bergen Cooper, Senior Research Advisor at the Preclusion Project and Chief Operating Officer with the Torchlight Collective, sit down to talk with us about the history of this destructive policy, its long and heart-wrenching impacts, and what the future of the GGR might look like.  

The GGR, introduced in 1984 by President Ronald Raegan, is a presidential memorandum that is either reinstated or revoked depending on which political party is in the Oval Office. In 2017, the rule was expanded by the Trump administration to apply to all global heath assistance funding. The GGR has, and continues to, affect LGBTQI populations, people living in rural areas, people living with disabilities, sex workers, and healthcare providers, when accessing or providing abortion, contraception, gender-based violence care, HIV /AIDS care, STI care, and more. With the possibility of a change in administration coming soon, the GGR under Project 2025 may extend its reach farther and worsen outcomes.

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

 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. 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
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. 

Well, Now: Slate's podcast about health and wellness

Support the show

Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back

Email us: [email protected]
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!