Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin used the Gosnell trial to suggest several ways to further diminish access to safe, legal abortion care in the United States through what she calls a “Gosnell amendment.” She has no idea what she is talking about.
Now that the voters have spoken, what’s going to happen next?
The vote could affect a longstanding match of abortion funding Ping-Pong between local residents and the federal government.
As a resident of Philadelphia and an abortion provider, I can tell you that the Gosnell case has gotten media coverage. But no one is talking about poor, under-insured, and under-served women.
Around the world — even here in Pennsylvania — women face obstacles to legitimate medical care, including preventive services like contraception, prenatal care and safe abortion care. However, such obstacles — legal and financial barriers, social stigma or language barriers — do not affect all women equally.
If we want all people to have access to care across the United States, we must create newsworthy initiatives calling for an expansion rather than a retraction of coverage, and we must call upon our elected representatives to do the same.
Requiring Medicaid coverage of abortion is a far cry from guaranteeing that people can access an abortion when they need one.
Today we have a welcomed opportunity to celebrate the proactive leadership that several municipal bodies across the country are taking in support of women’s access to reproductive health care services.
What if elected officials strongly and unequivocally spoke out in support of insurance coverage for abortion?
Georgia wants to join the flood of states trying to force women to give birth by making abortion unaffordable.