One bill would ban abortion providers from teaching sex education in public schools, while the other would require women seeking an abortion to receive information written by the state about the alleged mental health risks associated with the procedure.
The road ahead for abortion providers and their allies to not only preserve George Tiller’s specialized service, but simply to stay open, is hardly an easy one. But many of those who knew Dr. Tiller as a colleague and friend are no doubt fortified by remembering one of his favorite sayings: “Attitude is everything.”
On Thursday, a state judge heard arguments in a case challenging a 2012 law that severely restricts medication abortion and exposes doctors to felony prosecution for failure to comply.
Two Texas doctors say a hospital caved to anti-choice activist “demands” when it revoked their privileges because they provide legal abortion care.
A clinic in El Paso was forced to stop providing legal abortion care, and found no relief in a federal court on Wednesday when it asked for a restraining order against Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law.
By now, many have heard about the horrific vandalism that recently took place at Susan Cahill’s clinic in Montana. But what some people may not know is that Cahill was one of the pioneers in bringing advanced practice clinicians (APCs) into abortion care, thus expanding abortion access in underserved areas.
Slowly but surely pregnant workers are gaining more workplace protections, but Congress still needs to act.
The controversial measure was softened somewhat with an amendment, but advocates decry its chilling effect on medicine and its unconstitutionality.
Two clinics in underserved areas of Texas—one an abortion provider—closed their doors this week, as the effects of the omnibus anti-abortion access bill passed last summer with the support of conservative lawmakers continue to unfold across the state.
Under the legislation, a patient could sue a doctor within ten years of terminating a pregnancy, even after signing a form acknowledging informed consent. Bill opponents say it unfairly singles out one specific medical procedure, sets a disproportionately long statute of limitations, and is redundant.