Four days ago a young woman died giving birth in a bustling marketplace in New Delhi, just steps away from Parliament, and at the beginning of an international conference on maternal health. This is not acceptable.
There are many ways to save women’s lives, but the success of any given intervention depends on local context. What works in one locale may not work in another.
Mothers in New York are dying at twice the rate of the rest of the country, and Susan B. Anthony List gives up and that whole pesky “woman candidate” thing.
Why are Catholic hospitals allowed to treat Catholics and non-Catholics alike with flagrant disregard for the most basic of human rights, holding them hostage to the canons of a church even its own members don’t obey?
According to a report by Gonzalo Ortiz of InterPress News Service (IPS), Ecuador has achieved a steep decline in maternal deaths and illness through a model program “centered on the mother’s needs and not those of the doctor or midwife.”
What happens when a doctor’s conscience tells him the life of a non-viable fetus is more important than the life of the pregnant woman and what is the responsibility of the state?
Conventional wisdom won’t help reduce death and illness related to complications of pregnancy, childbirth or unsafe abortion. But a multi-facted approach to reducing maternal death and illness can.
As an addendum to yesterday’s a broad-brush overview of the implications for women of the health reform, here is an overview of how the bill addresses midwifery provided by certified nurse-midwives and expands the conditions under which nurse-midwives may provide broader health care services.
Pregnant women in the U.S. have a greater risk of dying from pregnancy or childbirth related complications than women in 40 other countries around the world. It’s past time to fix this.
We urgently need to make adolescent girls and young women a priority in research, legal reforms, and funding. Only by doing so can our societies overcome the “indecent inequality” of maternal death.