The Supreme Court's 303 Creative Decision and the Threat to LGBTQ+ Health Care

This Viewpoint examines the importance of the Supreme Court decision in 303 Creative and its possible effects on legislation safeguarding nondiscriminatory health care.

Institutional hybridity and policy-motivated reasoning structure public evaluations of the Supreme Court

How does the public assess the Supreme Court and its work? Using data from three surveys conducted over a span of ten years, we show that individuals' policy preferences drive evaluations of the Court and its willingness to reform the Court. We find strong evidence that the Court's hybrid legal-political nature enables a unique form of policy-motivated reasoning: respondents who agree with Court outputs view the Court and its work as more "legal" in nature, while those who disagree view both as more "political." Our findings stand in contrast to longstanding views in the literature that the public views the Court as a fundamentally different sort of institution that stands largely separate from politics. The fact that policy attitudes powerfully inform the public's assessment of the Court has crucial implications for the ongoing debates over Supreme Court power.

The Role of Telehealth in Promoting Equitable Abortion Access in the United States: Spatial Analysis

BACKGROUND

Even preceding the Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, patients in the United States faced exceptional barriers to reach abortion providers. Abortion restrictions disproportionately limited abortion access among people of color, young people, and those living on low incomes. Presently, clinics in states where abortion remains legal are experiencing an influx of out-of-state patients and wait times for in-person appointments are increasing. Direct-to-patient telehealth for abortion care has expanded since its introduction in the United States in 2020. However, the role of this telehealth model in addressing geographic barriers to and inequities in abortion access remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to examine the amount of travel that patients averted by using telehealth for abortion care, and the role of telehealth in mitigating inequities in abortion access by race or ethnicity, age, pregnancy duration, socioeconomic status, rural residence, and distance to a facility.

METHODS

We used geospatial analyses and data from patients in the California Home Abortion by Telehealth Study, residing in 31 states and Washington DC, who obtained telehealth abortion care at 1 of 3 virtual abortion clinics. We used patients' residential ZIP code data and data from US abortion facility locations to document the round-trip driving distance in miles, driving time, and public transit time to the nearest abortion facility that patients averted by using telehealth abortion services from April 2021 to January 2022, before the Dobbs decision. We used binomial regression to assess whether patients reported that telehealth was more likely to make it possible to access a timely abortion among patients of color, those experiencing food insecurity, younger patients, those with longer pregnancy durations, rural patients, and those residing further from their closest abortion facility.

RESULTS

The 6027 patients averted a median of 10 (IQR 5-26) miles and 25 (IQR 14-46) minutes of round-trip driving, and 1 hour 25 minutes (IQR 46 minutes to 2 hours 30 minutes) of round-trip public transit time. Among a subsample of 1586 patients surveyed, 43% (n=683) reported that telehealth made it possible to obtain timely abortion care. Telehealth was most likely to make it possible to have a timely abortion for younger patients (prevalence ratio [PR] 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6) for patients younger than 25 years of age compared to those 35 years of age or older), rural patients (PR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6), those experiencing food insecurity (PR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.4), and those who averted over 100 miles of driving to their closest abortion facility (PR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-1.9).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the role of telehealth in reducing abortion-related travel barriers in states where abortion remains legal, especially among patient populations who already face structural barriers to abortion care. Restrictions on telehealth abortion threaten health equity.

The future of FemTech ethics & privacy - a global perspective

We discuss the concept of women's empowerment in FemTech, considering cultural and legal differences, ethical concerns, and legal consequences. We claim that it is crucial to prioritize privacy, a fundamental right, especially in the case of changes in laws related to women's health, such as Roe v. Wade in the US.

Cancer and Pregnancy in the Post-Roe v. Wade Era: A Comprehensive Review

Cancer during pregnancy, affecting 1 in 1000 pregnancies, is rising in incidence due to delayed childbearing and improved detection. Common types include breast cancer, melanoma and cervical cancer and Hodgkin's Lymphoma. There are several physiological changes that occur during pregnancy that make its management a challenge to clinicians. Managing it requires multidisciplinary approaches and cautious test interpretation due to overlapping symptoms. To minimize fetal radiation exposure, non-ionizing imaging is preferred, and the interpretation of tumor markers is challenging due to inflammation and pregnancy effects. In terms of treatment, chemotherapy is avoided in the first trimester but may be considered later. Immunotherapy's safety is under investigation, and surgery depends on gestational age and cancer type. Ethical and legal concerns are growing, especially with changes in U.S. abortion laws. Access to abortion for medical reasons is vital for pregnant cancer patients needing urgent treatment. Maternal outcomes may depend on the type of cancer as well as chemotherapy received but, in general, they are similar to the non-pregnant population. Fetal outcomes are usually the same as the general population with treatment exposure from the second trimester onwards. Fertility preservation may be an important component of the treatment discussion depending on the patient's wishes, age and type of treatment. This article addresses the complicated nature of a diagnosis of cancer in pregnancy, touching upon the known medical literature as well as the ethical-legal implications of such a diagnosis, whose importance has increased in the light of recent judicial developments.

The Supreme Court Decision on Affirmative Action-Fewer Black Physicians and More Health Disparities for Minoritized Groups

This Viewpoint discusses the US Supreme Court’s June 2023 ruling on affirmative action and its repercussions for Black physicians and health equity for racial and ethnic minority groups.

The Supreme Court's Rulings on Race Neutrality Threaten Progress in Medicine and Health

This Viewpoint examines the recent Supreme Court rulings on race neutrality, striking down affirmative action programs in higher education, which will affect efforts to eliminate health inequities in the US.

The Fall of Roe v. Wade : The Addiction Specialist's Role in Championing Reproductive Rights

Reproductive age-pregnant individuals who use substances are disproportionately impacted by the US Supreme Court reversal of Roe v. Wade . Because of historic and ongoing discrimination against pregnant individuals who use substances, this group is at high risk for inadequate pregnancy options counseling and lack of access to safe and legal abortions. Fetal rights laws set a concerning precedent that further criminalize and penalize substance use in pregnancy. As addiction specialists, we have the professional responsibility to champion the reproductive freedoms of pregnant individuals who use substances. There are several ways that addiction specialists can uphold the reproductive rights of patients on an individual, state, and federal level, including the following: incorporate reproductive healthcare into addiction practices, help those seeking abortion navigate barriers, partner with perinatal healthcare clinicians to provide evidence-based addiction treatment during pregnancy, and support decriminalization and destigmatization of substance use, especially in pregnancy.

How the SCOTUS Affirmative Action Ruling Could Affect Medical Schools and Health Care

This Medical News feature examines the potential impact of the US Supreme Court’s affirmative action decision on medical schools and health care.

Private Actions to Protect Medicaid Live to See Another Day

This Viewpoint discusses the recently decided Supreme Court Talevski lawsuit that affirmed that private parties can enforce federal Medicaid law against noncompliant states.

The Impact of New and Renewed Restrictive State Abortion Laws on Pregnancy-Capable People with Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization in June 2022, the constitutional right to abortion was no longer protected by Roe v Wade. Fifteen states now have total or near-total bans on abortion care or no clinics providing abortion services. We review how these restrictions affect the medical care of people with pregestational diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the ten states with the highest percent of adult women living with diabetes, eight currently have complete or 6-week abortion bans. People with diabetes are at high risk of diabetes-related pregnancy complications and pregnancy-related diabetes complications and are disproportionately burdened by abortion bans. Abortion is an essential part of comprehensive, evidence-based diabetes care, yet no medical society has published guidelines on pregestational diabetes that explicitly discuss the importance and role of safe abortion care. Medical societies enacting standards for diabetes care and clinicians providing diabetes care must advocate for access to abortion to reduce pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality for pregnant people with diabetes.

Activism for Abortion Rights and Access Is Global: What the United States Can Learn from the Rest of the World

While the US Supreme Court's 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade guaranteed a legal right to abortion, universal access to legal abortion has never been achieved in the United States. At the same time, the Helms Amendment, a US foreign-assistance policy, is keeping millions of people around the world, particularly Black and Brown people, from receiving abortion-related information and services. As abortion-rights advocates in the United States look for ways to move forward in the post-Roe era, two sources can offer insights and inspiration: the inclusive, human rights-based reproductive justice framework, and some of the strategies and approaches being used to expand access in countries around the world with restrictive abortion laws.

A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding the Disconnection between Perceptions of Abortion Acceptability and Support for Roe v. Wade among US Adults

The relationship between people's attitudes about abortion acceptability and the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade-two distinct but related issues-has not been rigorously explored. The authors used a mixed-methods approach for analyzing in-depth interviews to better understand how participants' feelings toward abortion acceptability are related to perceptions of whether abortion should be legal. The authors then assessed (1) correlations between abortion acceptability and different measures of support for Roe v. Wade, and (2) how the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade may evoke different responses via an online survey fielded in 2018. The study's qualitative results highlight that there is a disjuncture between people's moral feelings toward abortion and their attitudes toward abortion legality. The study's quantitative results further demonstrate that correlations between abortion acceptability and support for Roe v. Wade are moderate, and the differences in responses to the phrasing of survey items related to Roe v. Wade are moderated by knowledge. The authors recommend that when researchers develop survey items, they avoid ambiguities of abortion as a general construct, especially when public opinion measures on abortion are employed for research and the design of social and health policy and practice.

Tubal Sterilization Requests at a Single Institution Following the Supreme Court Decision to Overturn the Constitutional Right to Abortion

This study uses data from electronic health records to examine the rate of tubal sterilization requests in 3 periods before and after the US Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, compared with the same periods in 2019 and 2021, at a single institution in Michigan.

Reproductive healthcare utilization in patients with bleeding disorders

The United States Supreme Court's ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade has potential grave implications, impacting access to reproductive healthcare for women across the country. Similarly, women and adolescent girls with bleeding disorders need access to high-quality reproductive health care because there is a significant risk of bleeding complications in these patients. Treatment decisions need to be made by patients and treating physicians and not as a consequence of political ideology. Women including those with bleeding disorders should be given the autonomy to make their own reproductive health decisions.

My Body, Your Body, Our Bodies

This poem was written by a high school student in the 9th grade and read aloud at an abortion speak out after the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overrule Roe v. Wade. The poem showcases the ways one young person has experienced the intersection of mental health, reproductive and sexual rights, and sense of wellbeing. To view the original version of this poem, see the supplemental material section of this article online.

"Forwards, Not Backwards": How the U.S. Supreme Court May Save the Plight of Individuals with Mental Disabilities

When federal district court Judge Carlton Reeves penned his opinion in U.S. v. Mississippi,1 the case that seemed poised to overhaul Mississippi's suffering mental health system, he began with the story of Ms. Melanie Worsham, a mental health patient, also a certified peer support specialist. Ms. Worsham works to help those like herself who suffer with lifelong serious mental illness (SMI) to "overcome the obstacles that might be getting in their way of living the life they want to live." She also assists those with SMI by aiding in "navigating the system, to find resources, and then just being moral support."2.