#HelloHyde seeks to celebrate the supposed one million lives “saved” by denying low-income individuals with Medicaid insurance access to abortion care. As the product of an unplanned pregnancy, I find this goal to be offensive, malicious, and enraging.
Trending Health Systems
- With Liberty and Justice for Some: Medicaid Recipients and the Hyde Amendment
- Report: States Restricting Abortion Access Don’t Help New Parents Either
- Pennsylvania Audits Anti-Choice Nonprofit Over Use of Taxpayer Money
- The Cultural Toll of the Hyde Amendment
- Why I Say ‘Disabled Person’ Instead of ‘Person With Disabilities’
- Arizona’s Outdated Medication Abortion Law Meets Its End
As a Washington, D.C., native and longtime resident, I know firsthand the effect Hyde restrictions have on women and their families.
The analysis by the National Partnership for Women & Families singles out a dozen states lacking even a single workplace protection for new parents–beyond what's required by federal law. These states also severely curb abortion-care access in health insurance.
Neither the U.S. House of Representatives nor the U.S. Senate have finalized the items on the legislative agenda. But if all goes as planned, lawmakers will leave Washington, D.C., by the end of the week and won’t return until at least November—potentially later.
In my work caring for Native American women relying on federally provided insurance in northern Arizona, I meet patients who are shocked when they learn that abortion care is not covered. They are accustomed to receiving care through the Indian Health Service and the centuries-old promise that tribes will have a special government-to-government relationship with the United States.
Women who received a year’s supply of birth control were about a third less likely to have an unplanned pregnancy, compared to those with a one- or three-month supply, according to a 2011 study.