Not exact matches
One possible step forward is that
abortion providers — as long as they are legally allowed in this country — should have to be independent corporations that
only perform
abortions and receive no federal funding, with regular inspections and investigations both financial and health - related, and the passing of new laws which more strictly regulate their practice.
Today the women's health care
providers who jointly filed suit last month on behalf of their patients have filed an emergency application with the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate an injunction granted by U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel on October 28 blocking a Texas provision requiring doctors who provide
abortions to obtain admitting privileges at a local hospital — a requirement that leading medical associations oppose and
only results in women losing access to safe medical care.
And Hidalgo is not the
only one; any number of Hagerty's members are in the crosshairs, though many of them, like the Teen Health Clinic at the Baylor College of Medicine, also have no affiliation with
abortion providers.
In 2012, Arizona, Michigan and Virginia took steps to establish stringent regulations that affect
only surgical and medication
abortion providers, but not other
providers of outpatient surgical and medical care.
In 2000, PPWP entered into discussions with Women's Health Services, the
only non-profit
abortion provider in Pittsburgh.
It would have left Texas with
only nine
abortion providers in the whole state, and the Supreme Court rightly ruled that would put an undue burden on women to access health care.
If the Court had upheld Texas» anti-
abortion restrictions,
only nine
abortion providers would have been left standing for Texas» 5.4 million women of reproductive age — and that's down from approximately 40 health centers before this dangerous law passed.
When Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota (the
only provider of safe and legal
abortions in the state of South Dakota) announced that they would begin implementation of a previously enacted 72 - hour waiting period, the South Dakota state legislature passed a bill that exempts weekends and holidays from the 72 hours, which means that a woman could be forced to wait as long as 5 or 6 days for an
abortion.
The proportion of U.S. contraceptive users relying on LARCs jumped from 2.4 % in 2002 to 14.3 % in 2014, the highest level ever recorded in the United States.9 There is also some evidence that LARCs are highly desired by many
abortion patients and that patient interest increases when LARCs are available for immediate postabortion initiation.1, 11,12 Notably, all contraceptive methods, including LARCs, are appropriate for immediate uptake following a surgical
abortion.13 In addition, recently updated medical guidelines support providing implants and injectable contraception at the time of a medication
abortion, along with previously available methods like the pill, patch and ring; the IUD is now the
only method that
providers can not offer on the day medication
abortion is started.14 This broader array of options is particularly significant given that medication
abortion represents an increasing proportion of all
abortions nationally.
The
only one of those centers that is a state - licensed
abortion provider in Missouri is in St. Louis.