Sentences with phrase «with abortion providers»

These limits exist alongside the already burdensome Hyde Amendment, which bars federal Medicaid coverage of abortion in most circumstances; 35 states decline to extend state Medicaid funds to cover abortion beyond very limited circumstances.19 This increasingly restricted environment creates severe disincentives for insurers to contract with abortion providers — and specialized abortion providers in particular — and for providers to accept insurance if contracts are offered.

The state of Texas» sustained campaign against Planned Parenthood and other family planning clinics affiliated with abortion providers appears to have led to an increase in births among low - income women who lost access to affordable and effective birth control, a new study says.

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.

Proponents of such restrictions are ultimately seeking to make abortion inaccessible for U.S. women, and so are seeking to shutter Planned Parenthood health centers and any safety - net health center providing publicly funded family planning services that additionally offers abortions (using other funds), or is affiliated with an abortion provider.

The law also seems to prohibit any type of third - party entity under contract with the state from entering into its own, separate contract with an abortion provider.

And the clinics neither provide abortions, nor are they affiliated with any abortion provider.

In 2013, politicians in Ohio passed a new «catch - 22» law forbidding public hospitals from entering into such an agreement with an abortion provider, even though they can enter into such agreements with any other facility.

So in 2013, the state ditched it and set up the state - funded Texas Women's Health Program, which could legally withhold funds from any clinic affiliated with an abortion provider.

Not exact matches

[I] f you want to hear honest talk about the realities of abortion, go speak with those abortion counselors and providers.

Abortion pills are fine with me but I don't automatically equate my employer with the «provider of all my medications» as some of you apparently do.

But before I did, I decided to discuss the issue with several medical professionals, some of whom are on the «pro-life» side and others of whom are on the «pro-choice» side, including a handful of abortion providers.

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.

Increasing its revenue to a record of almost $ 1.5 billion, the abortion provider's marketing leans into its opposition to Trump and identifying with the popular Women's March, the pro-life group noted.

An Obama appointee, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, ruled that Indiana's refusal to pay $ to Medicaid providers that also perform abortion interferes with Medicaid recipients rights to choose their own health care providers.

With no legal route to abortion (regardless of whether or not you agree with it), women turn to untrained and undertrained providers resulting in deaths and complicatiWith no legal route to abortion (regardless of whether or not you agree with it), women turn to untrained and undertrained providers resulting in deaths and complicatiwith it), women turn to untrained and undertrained providers resulting in deaths and complications.

Who provides care: lay health workers for caring for people with hypertension, lay health workers to deliver care for mothers and children or infectious diseases, lay health workers to deliver community - based neonatal care packages, midlevel health professionals for abortion care, social support to pregnant women at risk, midwife - led care for childbearing women, non-specialist providers in mental health and neurology, and physician - nurse substitution.

The panel sent out more than 30 information requests to universities, companies, and abortion clinics before issuing three formal subpoenas in February to the abortion provider Southwestern Women's Options (SWO), the tissue procurement company StemExpress, and UNM, whose health sciences center includes labs that work with fetal tissue from abortions performed by SWO.

Some states require abortion providers to provide women with written or verbal information suggesting that abortion increases a woman's risk of breast cancer or mental illness, despite the lack of valid scientific evidence of increased risk.

New documentary After Tiller follows the four remaining late - term abortion providers in the U.S., but it spends more time with the women who come to see them.

Such government restrictions, combined with clinic violence and harassment, have drastically reduced the number of abortion providers around the country and have made access to the remaining providers exceedingly difficult for growing numbers of women...» More.

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.

This policy requires doctors who object to providing medical care on the basis of religious or conscientious grounds (such as medical assistance in dying, abortion, birth control and gender confirmation surgery) to connect the patient with a person or agency who will either provide care or connect the patient with a willing provider of the service requested.

This policy requires doctors who object to providing medical care on the basis of religious or conscientious grounds (such as medical assistance in dying — «MAID» — but also abortion, birth control and gender confirmation surgery) to connect the patient with a person or agency who will either provide care or connect the patient with a willing provider of the service requested.

Just in the last two months, Arizona has taken two CAP bills all the way to the Supreme Court, where they were refused review: HB 2036, the 20 - week abortion ban, and HB 2800, which attempted to deny women with Medicaid coverage the right to access health care services at a provider of their choosing.

Conservative policymakers have sought to undermine these protections, most notably by trying to deny Medicaid reimbursement for family planning and related services to Planned Parenthood health centers and other providers that either offer abortion - related services or are affiliated with a provider that does so.10

Socially conservative policymakers are also seeking to wholly eliminate or undermine the Title X family planning program, by directing Title X funding to FQHC sites while excluding providers focused on reproductive health, some of which also offer abortions with separate funding.

First, the state moved to ban Planned Parenthood health centers from participating in the Women's Health Program, based solely on the fact that these centers were associated with other sites where abortions were provided; Planned Parenthood health centers had been serving about four in 10 women in the program statewide, and some sites served as many as eight in 10 women within their service areas.22 The Obama administration made clear that Texas» action violated federal law by discriminating against qualified providers.

Policymakers are now targeting Planned Parenthood Arizona and other abortion providers in the state with a bill (HB2284) that would allow unannounced inspections of health centers by the Department of Health Services.

Other policies look to exclude any entity that provides abortions, or any family planning provider that is formally affiliated with such an entity; this typically affects safety - net health centers that focus on reproductive health care, rather than primary care, including — but not limited to — Planned Parenthood.

The report notes that the reduction in the number of women served is «due, in part, to the change in the provider base» that occurred with the 2012 exclusion of abortion providers and affiliates.

Arizona, for example, passed a law in 2016 that allows the state's Medicaid program to exclude any provider that receives any type of public funding and also provides abortion, or is affiliated with a provider that does so.

Last week, over protests from thousands of Ohioans statewide, Governor John Kasich signed a budget into law without exercising his line - item veto to strike a Targeted Restriction of Abortion Providers (TRAP) provision prohibiting transfer agreements with public hospitals, a mandatory ultrasound provision, as well as a measure designed to block funds for preventive health care at Planned Parenthood health centers in Ohio.

Furthermore, the Obama administration has vehemently rejected states» attempts to deny Medicaid reimbursements to Planned Parenthood and other providers associated with abortion, most prominently in an April 2016 letter to state officials.5, 6 The letter made clear that such efforts are in violation of federal law, which guarantees enrollees a free choice of qualified providers for family planning care.

The North Carolina provision requires abortion providers who believe that a woman might be the victim of domestic violence to provide her with information about available social services.

Under governor Rick Perry, the state forfeited the $ 9 - to - $ 1 match in federal Medicaid dollars for women's health with the sole purpose of excluding abortion providers from the state women's health program.

In response to a pair of related inquiries made last year by Deuell and HHSC Commissioner Tom Suehs, Attorney General Greg Abbott opined that the state could keep Planned Parenthood from providing any WHP services — by blocking Medicaid funds for any health care provider that's «affiliated» with an abortion care provider, even if it doesn't provide abortion services itself (see «Women's Health: Ideology First!

Targeted restrictions against abortion providers (TRAP) that place unreasonable requirements on health care centers, slowly erode access to abortion, have nothing to do with improving the health or safety of women — and have everything to do with politics

Providers that offer abortion services or are affiliated with a provider that does so would be ineligible, as would any entity that makes abortion referrals — a direct violation of the federal regulations governing the Title X program, which require Title X — funded sites to offer nondirective pregnancy - options counseling and referral.

PPAZ stands in solidarity with patients in need of health care and providers of legal, late abortions.

The landmark U.S. Supreme Court case Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt centered on two TRAP provisions: a mandate that all abortion providers comply with onerous and medically unnecessary building requirements for ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), and an unfair, also medically unnecessary requirement that doctors who provide abortions obtain hospital admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

With the shortage of qualified abortion providers (there are no providers in 87 percent of U.S. counties and in 97 percent of rural areas), Landy and Darney have made an enormous impact in the effort to ensure that women across the country have access to the full range of quality health care.

«Planned Parenthood is the nation's largest and most trusted voluntary provider of reproductive health services because we provide our patients with unbiased, medically accurate information about the full range of pregnancy options: parenting, adoption and abortion — as well as access to birth control to prevent future unintended pregnancies,» added Foster.

In 2000, PPWP entered into discussions with Women's Health Services, the only non-profit abortion provider in Pittsburgh.

For several years, Ohio has required that abortion providers maintain a written transfer agreement with a local public hospital.

SB 1722 / HB 1411 significantly impacts women's access to abortion care with over 10 changes to current regulations by requiring medically unnecessary admitting privileges or transfer agreements for abortion providers.

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.

The case Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt centers on two TRAP provisions: a mandate that all abortion providers comply with onerous and medically unnecessary building requirements for ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), and an unfair, also medically unnecessary requirement that doctors who provide abortions obtain hospital admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

In keeping with standards of medical practice, abortion providers already give all prospective patients full information about their options, medical procedures and risks, and all other information they need for voluntary, informed consent.

Rather it could embolden state politicians to block patients with low incomes who rely on Title X from getting care from reproductive health care providers, including Planned Parenthood, just because they provide safe, legal abortion.

This administration is carrying out a full - scale attack on birth control — eliminating insurance coverage for birth control, eliminating programs that help women with low incomes access birth control, and moving to prohibit health care providers from even giving women information about birth control or abortion.