By Jordan Brooks and Tamar Ezer
Expanding access to midwives and doulas in the United States is a vital and often overlooked way to increase access to culturally-congruent birthing options during pregnancy and improve health outcomes for birthing individuals and their children.
By Katherine Kraschel
The loss in Dobbs and the bleak outlook for abortion rights within the federal courts may afford advocates a unique opportunity to fully adopt a reproductive justice framework and apply it to access to fertility care, as other contributors to this symposium have argued.
This article outlines specific strategies for blue states eager to stake a claim in the reproductive justice movement to consider.
By Scott J. Schweikart*
Many medical professionals in the United States today face a personal dilemma over whether to delay (and potentially forego) starting a family in order to fulfill lengthy medical training. In response to these concerns, the American Medical Association (AMA) recently passed a new policy that supports trainee access to assisted reproductive technologies (ART).
By Kimberly Mutcherson
As advocates construct arguments for saving and expanding abortion access, they should also think deeply about what it means to deny or refuse would-be mothers from traditionally disfavored groups the access to assisted reproductive technology.
By Courtney G. Joslin
Increasing numbers of people are forming families through assisted reproduction. Recently, there has been a push to impose new regulations on various aspects of this process. Some of these new laws open up participants to a range of possible penalties — civil, criminal, and/or professional discipline — for past “misconduct.” Other laws seek proactively to regulate the fertility care process. For example, some laws regulate the collection and dissemination of medical and identifying information about gamete providers — that is, sperm and egg donors. Other proposals seek to require gamete providers to agree to the release of their medical records.
It is surely important to assess and evaluate fertility care practices and to consider whether additional regulation is appropriate in this space. Particularly in the post-Dobbs era — an era marked by increasing attacks on reproductive health care (including access to IVF) and on LGBTQ people — it is also important to proceed cautiously and to consider how these proposals may adversely impact reproductive autonomy and family recognition.
By I. Glenn Cohen
It is estimated that roughly one in five hundred U.S. women suffer from Uterine Factor Infertility — they were born without a uterus, they lost their uterus, or their uterus no longer functions. Until very recently, this essentially meant that pregnancy was not an option for these women. Because of uterus transplants, this is beginning to change. Such transplants raise a host of legal and ethical questions, which I will preview in this piece.
By Laura Briggs
When Amy Coney Barrett suggested that adoption and safe-haven laws were an adequate substitute for abortion care for people who did not want to be pregnant, she was essentially insisting that they do a kind of high-risk, uncompensated labor to produce a baby or child for adoptive families like hers.
Like the anti-abortion movement that supported her nomination for the Supreme Court, Coney Barrett is not shy about acknowledging that she is in favor of forced pregnancy, and that this labor — in both senses of the term — could benefit other people who were childless or had fewer children than they wanted.
We know this work has value; people who hire women in the United States to carry a surrogate pregnancy pay them $30,000 to $50,000. Denying abortion to women who want them, and then expecting them to relinquish the resulting baby for adoption, is asking them to do that same labor for free.
As Black feminist legal scholar Pamela Bridgewater has pointed out, there is a word for forcing people to do unpaid reproductive labor on behalf of others: enslavement. In fact, as she argues, forced pregnancy was key to the historic labor system of slavery in the United States — the children of enslaved mothers were themselves enslaved, and once the importation of African people for purposes of enslavement was banned in the United States in 1808, it was how slavers kept the system going and increased their own wealth, including by raping enslaved women. Slavery was outlawed in the United States with the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, but Coney Barrett apparently means to reinstitute a version of it.
By Alexa Richardson
This month, activists in Colorado succeeded in passing a sweeping package of bills designed to address lack of access, inequities, and mistreatment throughout the obstetric system.
The ambitious provisions offer a new model for legislative approaches to transforming maternity care.
The bills, SB21-193, SB21-194, and SB21-101, were crafted in large part through the efforts of Elephant Circle, an organization that advocates birth justice by promoting self-determination and support for pregnant people, and tackling power and oppression. In an interview, Elephant Circle Founder and Director, Indra Lusero, described the Birth Equity Bill Package as “an opportunity to change the conversation by pulling together the broad range of issues facing pregnant people and presenting them as one coherent policy platform.”
By Jenna Becker
The exclusion of pregnant people from clinical trials has led to inequities in health care during pregnancy. Without clinical data, pregnant patients lack the drug safety evidence available to most other patients. Further, denying access to clinical trials denies pregnant people autonomy in medical decision-making.
Pregnant people still require pharmaceutical interventions after becoming pregnant. Until maternal health and autonomy is prioritized, pregnant people will be left to make medical decisions without real guidance.
By Elyssa Spitzer
Pregnant and postpartum people in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and U.S. Marshals Service receive care directed by policies that fail to meet national standards, according to a report recently issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
This, despite the fact that, incarcerated women are among the most vulnerable people, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. In the GAO report’s terms, incarcerated women: “often have medical and mental health conditions that make their pregnancies a high risk for adverse outcomes, which is compounded by inconsistent access to adequate, quality pregnancy care and nutrition while in custody.”
Notably, the report found that the BOP and U.S. Marshals’ policies failed to satisfy the national standards — to say nothing of the gaps that may exist between written policy and the care that is, in fact, provided. Read More