rePROs Fight Back

Young people face all the same barriers that adults face in accessing abortion care, but in states like Texas, youth also face a parental consent law. Rosann Mariappuram, Executive Director of Jane’s Due Process, sits down to talk with us about this extra barrier to care, and what it looks like after the passage of the six-week abortion ban, SB8.

While also having to navigate the labyrinth of general, state-based abortion restrictions (such as mandatory ultrasounds, 24-hour waiting periods, a lack of abortion clinics in the state, and taking time off work and school), those under 18 in Texas must also receive parental or guardian consent when accessing abortion care. For many young people this can be an especially difficult challenge. If consent cannot be obtained, young people must go through a judicial bypass, or speaking with a judge to obtain a court order to receive an abortion. 

Judicial bypass processes often involve extremely invasive questions meant to gauge young people’s “intelligence or emotional stability.” Judges ask questions about the pregnancy, family life, grades, and other personal concerns. Texas’s passage of the six-week abortion ban, SB8, has complicated the judicial bypass process. The process, which already required two to three weeks of careful legal counseling, is forcing Jane’s Due Process staff to work under a tighter schedule. Still, this legislation has left many teens unattended in their need for abortion care; in fact, during the first month of SB8’s passage, abortion care in the state dropped by 50%, and 70-90% for young people.

Sex education is not required in the state of Texas, but if sex education is taught, the current curriculum does not necessitate the sharing of information on contraception and abortion, nor does the curriculum require LGBTQ+ inclusivity. Texas also has some of the worst maternal mortality rates in the U.S., especially for Black women. New research has shown that, while Black women make up only 11% of Texas births, they make up 30% of maternal deaths. 

With no inclusive and supportive sex education and an extremely troubling maternal mortality status, Texas does not prove a hospitable state for exercising one’s reproductive health. Abortion is incredibly difficult to access, especially after the passage of the six-week ban. Many patients are being forced to travel outside of the state and spend considerable amounts of money on transportation methods and overnight accommodations, while abortion funds and clinics are continuing to face increasing barriers to providing care, emotional and mental stress, and legal repercussions.

Take Action

Follow Jane’s Due Process on Facebook and Twitter here and stay up-to-date on their important work.

Show love to abortion funds! You can find the abortion fund nearest you here. There’s many ways to help, including donating, volunteering, and fundraising!

Get involved in state and local politics. Discuss sex education, abortion access, and contraception access with state representatives, city council members, and school board members. 

Voting is incredibly important to protecting sexual and reproductive health and rights—vote in every election you can.

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 pregnancy. 

You can also support friends, family members, or loved ones during their medication abortion by bringing them a care basket, joining them to watch movies while they complete their abortion, or simply validating their experiences. Learn more in Caitlin Blunnie’s blog post here!

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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

Autistic Self-Advocacy Network on Twitter

Autistic Self-Advocacy Network on Facebook

Information on the EACH Act

Information on the Women’s Health Protection Act

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 Twitter. Follow Jessica Mason Pieklo on Twitter here. You can find Katelyn Burns’ pieces on Vox here and follow her on Twitter here.

Be kind to yourself and rest. Speak with your friends and family about the attacks on these human rights. As Jessica Pieklo says, “rest is revolutionary!”

Donate to abortion funds, who are working tirelessly to provide timely, basic medical care to many in states that are restricting or banning access.

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 Filipovic’s piece, How US Abortion Politics Distorts Women’s Lives in Conflict Zones, here. You can also follow Jill on Twitter. 

Be mindful of the organizations that you support or donate to and continue to research whether or not they support a full range of reproductive health and rights, including safe abortion. 

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

Email us: [email protected]
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 Greene Foster on Twitter

Dr. Diana Greene Foster’s New York Times piece, What Happens When It’s Too Late of Get an Abortion 

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

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

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

It’s that time of year again—time to tune in for a reprisal of our most popular series! Longtime supporters of rePROs Fight Back have likely heard our past podcast episodes, SRHR Hero Origin Stories, SRHR Hero Origin Stories: Round 2, and SRHR Hero Origin Stories: Round 3, where we talked to a number of amazing heroes in the field of reproductive health, rights, and about how they began working in this space. This time, hear from abortion and sexual reproductive healthcare clinicians and providers themselves about their experiences and history working in this field. 

Guests include: 

Rae Pickett, Director of Communications - Virginia League for Planned Parenthood

Dr. Jennifer Chin - Fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health

Dr. Christina Bourne – Trust Women Wichita  

Dr. Toni Marengo – Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest

Dr. Deyang Nyandak - Fellow with Physicians for Reproductive Health

Take Action

Follow these organizations on social media and keep up-to-date on their amazing work! 

Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest Facebook and Twitter

Virginia League for Planned Parenthood on Facebook and Twitter

Trust Women on Facebook and Twitter

Physicians for Reproductive Health on Facebook and Twitter

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

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

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!

(note recorded before the oral arguments in Texas case)

On Monday, November 1st, 2021, the Supreme Court heard arguments on Texas’s extreme and dangerous abortion ban, SB8. Ianthe Metzger, Director of State Media Campaigns with the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, sits down to talk with us about abortion access in Texas, the Texas SCOTUS case, and the upcoming Mississippi case in December that could threaten the very foundation of Roe v. Wade.

Currently, in Texas, the state has continued to maintain its six-week abortion ban, SB8. The law is particularly unique in that it allows anyone to be able to sue those who assist in the provision or accessing of abortion care. To learn more in depth about Texas’s law, find rePROs Fight Back’s podcast episode here. The U.S. Department of Justice has brought the case to the Supreme Court, which will have, at the airing of this podcast episode, been heard on Monday, November 1st, 2021. During the hearings, the Court will be considering whether the federal government has the right to sue to block a state’s enforcement of such a law. Additionally, the Court will be assessing the specifics of the enforcement structure in a case brought by abortion providers.

 On December 1st, 2021, the Supreme Court will be hearing Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The law will be brought in front of the Court by the Center for Reproductive Rights in an effort to challenge Mississippi’s fifteen-week abortion ban that is currently blocked from going into effect. The state of Mississippi has explicitly asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision guaranteeing the constitutional right to abortion. Allowing this law to go into effect would overturn the core holding of Roe and will no doubt open the floodgates to allow similar states to pass restrictive abortion legislation. In fact, 26 states are currently poised to ban abortion if Roe is overturned, possibly affecting 36 million women, trans men, and nonbinary folk’s access to abortion care. 

 If Roe v. Wade were to be overturned, patients in those 26 states will face decreased or nonexistent access to abortion care, be forced to travel hundreds of miles to visit an abortion provider, and place additional strain on the abortion clinics in states that will see an increase in out-of-state patient visits. It would also place an enormous, additional emotional weight on the staff of reproductive health clinics.

 It’s important to remember that Roe v. Wade is the floor, not the ceiling. Abortion access is, for so may around the country, a right on paper only. That being said, Roe is an important safeguard for abortion’s constitutionality and continued access. The Women’s Health Protection Act (WHPA) would secure abortion access across the U.S. and protect against laws like Texas’s SB8-- and it has already passed the House of Representatives. With passage of legislation like WHPA abortion care will be better safeguarded in the U.S.

Links

Planned Parenthood Federation of America on Twitter

Planned Parenthood Federation of America on Facebook

For more information, check out Relationscapes: https://www.relationscapes.org/

Support the show

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

Buy rePROs Merch: Bonfire store

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

Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!