These women ran an underground abortion network in the 1960s. Here’s what they fear might happen today | CNN



CNN
 — 

The voice on the phone in 1966 was gruff and abrupt: “Do you want the Chevy, the Cadillac or the Rolls Royce?”

A Chevy abortion would cost about $200, cash in hand, the voice explained. A Cadillac was around $500, and the Rolls Royce was $1,000.

“You can’t afford more than the Chevy? Fine,” the voice growled. “Go to this address at this time. Don’t be late and don’t forget the cash.” The voice disappeared.

Dorie Barron told CNN she recalls staring blankly at the phone in her hand, startled by the sudden empty tone. Then it hit her: She had just arranged an illegal abortion with the Chicago Mafia.

The motel Barron was sent to was in an unfamiliar part of Chicago, a scary “middle of nowhere,” she said. She was told to go to a specific room, sit on the bed and wait. Suddenly three men and a woman came in the door.

“I was petrified. They spoke all of three sentences to me the entire time: ‘Where’s the money?’ ‘Lie back and do as I tell you.’ And finally ‘Get in the bathroom,’” when the abortion was over, Barron said. “Then all of a sudden they were gone.”

Bleeding profusely, Barron managed to find a cab to take her home. When the bleeding didn’t stop, her bed-ridden mother made her go to the hospital.

At 24, Barron was taking care of her ailing mother and her 2-year-old daughter when she discovered she was pregnant. Her boyfriend, who had no job and lived with his parents, “freaked,” said Barron, who appears in a recent HBO documentary. The boyfriend suggested she get an abortion. She had never considered that option.

“But what was I to do? My mom was taking care of my daughter from her bed while I worked — they would read and play games until I got home,” Barron said.”How was either of us going to cope with a baby?

“Looking back, I realize I was taking my life in my hands,” said Barron, now an 81-year-old grandmother. “To this day it gives me chills. If I had died, what in God’s green earth would have happened to my mom and daughter?”

Women in the 1960s endured restrictions relatively unknown to women today. The so-called “fairer sex” could not serve on juries and often could not get an Ivy League education. Women earned about half as much as a man doing the same job and were seldom promoted.

Women could not get a credit card unless they were married — and then only if their husband co-signed. The same applied to birth control — only the married need apply. More experienced women shared a workaround with the uninitiated: “Go to Woolworth, buy a cheap wedding-type ring and wear it to your doctor’s appointment. And don’t forget to smile.”

Marital rape wasn’t legally considered rape. And, of course, women had no legal right to terminate a pregnancy until four states — Alaska, Hawaii, New York and Washington — legalized abortion in 1970, three years before Roe v. Wade became the law of the land.

Illinois had no such protection, said Heather Booth, a lifelong feminist activist and political strategist: “Three people discussing having an abortion in Chicago in 1965 was a conspiracy to commit felony murder.”

Despite that danger, a courageous band of young women — most in their 20’s, some in college, some married with children — banded together in Chicago to create an underground abortion network. The group was officially created in 1969 as the “Abortion Counseling Service of Women’s Liberation.”

But after running ads in an underground newspaper: “Pregnant? Don’t want to be? Call Jane,” each member of the group answered the phone as “Jane.”

Despite their youth, members of Jane managed to run an illegal abortion service dedicated to each woman's needs.
From left: Martha Scott, Jeanne Galatzer-Levy, Abby Pariser, Sheila Smith and Madeline Schwenk.

“We were co-conspirators with the women who called us,” said 75-year-old Laura Kaplan, who published a book about the service in 1997 entitled “The Story of Jane: The Legendary Underground Feminist Abortion Service.”

“We’ll protect you; we hope you’ll protect us,” Kaplan said. “We’ll take care of you; we hope you’ll take care of us.”

What started as referrals to legitimate abortion providers changed to personalized service when some members of Jane learned to safely do the abortions themselves. Between the late 1960s and 1973, the year that the Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade, Jane had arranged or performed over 11,000 abortions.

“Our culture is always searching for heroes,” said Kaplan. “But you don’t have to be a hero to do extraordinary things. Jane was just ordinary people working together — and look what we could accomplish, which is amazing, right?”

Even after several members were caught and arrested, the group continued to provide abortions for women too poor to travel to states where abortion had been legalized.

“I prayed a lot. I didn’t want to go to jail,” said 80-year-old Marie Learner, who allowed the Janes to perform abortions at her apartment.

“Some of us had little children. Some were the sole breadwinners in their home,” Learner said. “It was fearlessness in the face of overwhelming odds.”

Marie Learner opened her home to women undergoing abortions. Her neighbors knew, she said, but did not tell police.

The story of Jane has been immortalized in Kaplan’s book, numerous print articles, a 2022 movie, “Call Jane,” starring Elizabeth Banks and Sigourney Weaver, and a documentary on HBO (which, like CNN, is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery).

Today the historical tale of Jane has taken on a new significance. After the 2022 Supreme Court reversal of Roe v. Wade and the mid-term takeover of the US House of Representatives by Republicans, emboldened conservative lawmakers and judges have acted on their anti-abortion beliefs.

Currently more than a dozen states have banned or imposed severe restrictions on abortion. Georgia has banned abortions after six weeks, even though women are typically unaware they are pregnant at that stage. In mid-April, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill that would ban most abortions after six weeks. It won’t go into effect until the state Supreme Court overturns its previous precedent on abortion. Several other states are considering similar legislation. In other states, judicial battles are underway to protect abortion access.

“It’s a horrific situation right now. People will be harmed, some may even die,” said Booth, who helped birth the Jane movement while in college.

“Women without family support, without the information they need, may be isolated and either harm themselves looking to end an unwanted pregnancy or will be harmed because they went to an unscrupulous and illegal provider,” said Booth, now 77.

A key difference between the 60s and today is medication abortion, which 54% of people in the United States used to end a pregnancy in 2022. Available via prescription and through the mail, use of the drugs is two-fold: A person takes a first pill, mifepristone, to block the hormone needed for a pregnancy to continue.  A day or two later, the patient takes a second drug, misoprostol, which causes the uterus to contract, creating the cramping and bleeding of labor.

In early April a Texas judge, US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk – a Trump appointee who has been vocal about his anti-abortion stance — suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone despite 23 years of data showing the drug is safe to use, safer even than penicillin or Viagra.

On Friday, the Supreme Court froze the ruling and a subsequent decision by the Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals at the request of the Justice Department and the drug manufacturer. The action allows access to mifepristone in states where it’s legal until appeals play out over the months to come.

However, 15 states currently restrict access to medication abortion, even by mail.

The actions of anti-abortion activists, who have been accused of “judge shopping” to get the decisions they want, is “an unprecedented attack on democracy meant to undermine the will of the vast majority of Americans who want this pill — mifepristone — to remain legal and available,” Heather Booth told CNN.

“This is a further weaponization of the courts to brazenly advance the end goal of banning abortion entirely,” she added.

If women in her day could have had access to medications that could be used safely in their homes, they would not have been forced to risk their lives, said Dorie Barron, thinking back to her own terrifying abortion in a sketchy Chicago motel.

“I’m depressed as hell, watching stupid, indifferent men control and destroy women’s lives all over again,” she said. “I really fear getting an abortion could soon be like 1965.”

Chicago college student Heather Booth had just finished a summer working with civil rights activists in Mississippi when she was asked to help with a different kind of injustice.

Heather Booth, 18, with civil rights heroine Fannie Lou Hamer during

A girl in another dorm was considering suicide because she was pregnant. Booth, who excelled at both organization and chutzpah, found a local doctor and negotiated an abortion for the girl. Word spread quickly.

“There were about 100 women a week calling for help, much more than one person could handle,” Booth said. “I recruited about 12 other people and began training them how to do the counseling.”

Counseling was a key part of the new service. This was a time when people “barely spoke about sex, how women’s bodies functioned or even how people got pregnant,” Booth said. To help each woman understand what was going to happen to them, Booth quizzed the abortion provider about every aspect of the procedure.

“What do you do in advance? Will it be painful? How painful? Can you walk afterwards? Do you need someone to be with you to take you home?” The questions continued: “What amount of bleeding is expected, and can a woman handle it on their own? If there’s a problem is there an urgent number they can call?”

Armed with details few if any physicians provided, the counselors at Jane could fully inform each caller about the abortion experience. The group even published a flyer describing the procedure, long before the groundbreaking 1970 book “Our Bodies, Ourselves” began to educate women about their sexuality and health.

“I don’t particularly like doctors because I always feel dissatisfied with the experience,” said Marie Learner, who spoke to many of the women who underwent an abortion at her home.

“But after their abortion at Jane, women told me, ‘Wow, that was the best experience I’ve ever had with people helping me with a medical issue.’”

Eileen Smith, now 73, was one of those women. “Jane made you feel like you were part of this bigger picture, like we were all in this together,” she said. “They helped me do this illegal thing and then they’re calling to make sure I’m OK? Wow!

“For me, it helped battle the feeling that I was a bad person, that ‘What’s wrong with me? Why did I get pregnant? I should know better’ voice in my head,” said Smith. “It was priceless.”

Like many young women in the 60s, Heather Booth often protested for civil and women's rights.

Many of the women who joined Jane had never experienced an abortion. Some viewed the work as political, a part of the burgeoning feminist movement. Others considered the service as simply humanitarian health care. All saw the work as an opportunity to respect each woman’s choice.

“I was a stay-at-home mom with four kids,” said Martha Scott, who is now in her 80s. “We knew the woman needed to feel as though she was in control of what was happening to her. We were making it happen for her, but it was not about us. It was about her.”

Some volunteers, like Dorie Barron, experienced the Jane difference firsthand when she found herself pregnant a few years after her abortion at the hands of the Mafia.

“It was a 100% total reversal — I had never experienced such kindness,” Barron said. Not only did a Jane hold each woman’s hand and explain every step of the process, “they gave each of us a giant supply of maternity sanitary pads, and a nice big handful of antibiotics,” she said. “And for the next week, I got a phone call every other day to see how I was.”

Barron soon began volunteering for Jane by providing pregnancy testing for women in the back of a church in Chicago’s Hyde Park.

“It wasn’t just abortion,” Barron explained. “We also said, ‘You could consider adoption,’ and gave adoption referrals. And if the woman wanted to continue with her pregnancy, we said, ‘Fine, please by all that is holy make sure you get prenatal care, take your vitamins, and eat as best you can.’ It was women helping women with whatever they needed.”

Most of the women who contacted Jane were unable to support themselves, in unhealthy relationships, or already had children at home, so the service was a way of “helping them get back on track,” said Smith, who, like Barron, had begun working for Jane after her abortion.

“We were telling them ‘This isn’t the end of the world. You can continue to leave your boyfriend or your husband or continue to just take care of those kids you have.’ We were there to help them get through this,” said Smith, who later became a homecare nurse.

From left: Eileen Smith, Diane Stevens and Benita Greenfield were three of the dozens of women who volunteered for Jane.

Diane Stevens says she came to work for Jane after experiencing an abortion in 1968 at the age of 19. She was living in California at the time, which provided “therapeutic abortions” if approved in advance by physicians.

“I’d had a birth control failure, and I was coached by Planned Parenthood on how to do this,” said Stevens, now 74. “I had to see two psychiatrists and one doctor and tell them I was not able to go through with the pregnancy because it would a danger to both my physical and mental health.

“I was admitted to the psychiatric ward, although I didn’t really know that — I thought I was just in a hospital bed. But oh no, ‘I was mentally ill,’ so that’s where they put me,” said Stevens, who later went to nursing school with Smith. “Then they wheeled me off for the abortion. I had general anesthesia, was there for two days, and then I was discharged. Isn’t that crazy?”

Sakinah Ahad Shannon, now 75, was one of the few Black women who volunteered as a counselor at Jane. She joined after accompanying a friend who was charged a mere $50 for her abortion. At that time, Jane’s fee was between $1 and $100, based on what the woman could afford to pay, Shannon said.

“When I walked in, I said, ‘Oh my God, here we go again. It’s a room of White women, archangels who are going to save the world,’” said Shannon, a social worker and member of the Congress of Racial Equality, an interracial group of non-violent activists who pioneered “Freedom Rides” and helped organize the March on Washington in 1963.

What she heard and saw at her friend’s counseling session was so impressive it “changed my life,” Shannon said. She and her family later opened and operated three Chicago abortion clinics for over 25 years, all using the Jane philosophy of communication and respect.

“It was a profoundly amazing experience for me,” she said. “I call the Janes my sisters. The color line didn’t matter. We were all taking the same risk.”

Sakinah Ahad Shannon and her daughters went on to open and run three abortion clinics in Chicago.

It wasn’t long before the women discovered a “doctor” performing abortions for Jane had been lying about his credentials. There was no medical degree — in the HBO documentary, he admitted he had honed his skills by assisting an abortion provider.

The group imploded. A number of members quit in horror and dismay. For the women who stayed, it was an epiphany, said Martha Scott. Like her, several of the Janes had been assisting this fake doctor for years, learning the procedures step by step.

“You’d learn how to insert a speculum, then how to swap out the vagina with an antiseptic, then how to give numbing shots around the cervix and then how to dilate the cervix. You learned and mastered each step before you moved on to the next,” said Laura Kaplan, who chronicled the procedure in her book.

By now, several of the Janes were quite experienced and willing to do the work. Why not perform the abortions themselves?

“Clearly, this was an intense responsibility,” said Judith Acana, a 27-year-old high school teacher who joined Jane in 1970. She started her training by helping “long terms,” women who were four or five months along in the pregnancy.

“Remember, abortion was illegal (in Illinois) so it could take weeks for a woman to find help,” said Arcana, now 80. “Frequently women who wanted an abortion at 8 or 10 weeks wound up being 16 or 18 weeks or more by the time they found Jane.”

The miscarriage could happen quickly, but it rarely did, she said. It usually took anywhere from one to two days.

“Women who had no one to help them would come back when contractions started,” Arcana said. “One of my strongest memories is of a teenage girl who had an appointment to have her miscarriage on my living room floor.”

The group also paid two Janes to live in an apartment and be on call 24/7 to assist women who had no one to help them miscarry at home, said Arcana, a lifelong educator, author and poet. “But many women took care of it on their own, in very amazing and impressive and powerful ways,” she said.

Judith Arcana learned how to do abortions herself and wrote about the Jane experience in poems, stories, essays and books.

Any woman who had concerns or questions while miscarrying alone could always call Jane for advice any time of the day or night.

“People would call in a panic: ‘The bleeding won’t stop,’” Smith recalled. “I would tell them, ‘Get some ice, put it on your stomach, elevate your legs, relax.’ And they would say ‘Oh my gosh, thank you!’ because they were so scared.”

For women who were in their first trimester, Jane offered traditional D&C abortions — the same dilation and curettage used by hospitals then and today, said Scott, who performed many of the abortions for Jane. Later the group used vacuum aspiration, which was over in a mere five to 10 minutes.

“Vacuum aspiration was much easier to do, and I think it’s less difficult for the woman,” Scott said. “Abortion is exactly like any other medical procedure. It’s the decision that’s an issue — the doing is very straightforward. This was something a competent, trained person could do.”

It was May 3, 1972. Judith Arcana was the driver that day, responsible for relocating women waiting at what was called “the front” to a separate apartment or house where the abortions were done, known as “the place.”

On this day, a Wednesday, the “place” was a South Shore high-rise apartment. Arcana was escorting a woman who had completed her abortion when they were stopped by police at the elevator.

“They asked us, ‘Which apartment did you come out of?’ And the poor woman burst into tears and blurted out the apartment number,” Arcana said. “They took me downstairs, put cuffs on me and hooked me to a steel hook inside of the police van.”

Inside the apartment on the 11th floor, Martha Scott said she was setting up the bedroom for the next abortion when she heard a knock at the door, followed by screaming: “You can’t come in!”

“I shut the bedroom door and locked it,” Scott said, then hid the instruments and sat on the bed to wait. It wasn’t long until a cop kicked the door in and made her join the other women in the living room.

“We tell this joke about how the cops came in, saw all these women and said, ‘Where’s the abortionist?’ You know, assuming that it would be a man,” Scott said.

By day’s end, seven members of Jane were behind bars: Martha Scott, Diane Stevens, Judy Arcana, Jeanne Galatzer-Levy, Abby Pariser, Sheila Smith and Madeleine Schwenk. Suddenly what had been an underground effort for years was front page headlines.

“Had we not gotten arrested, I think no one would ever have known about Jane other than the women we served,” Scott said.

Top: Sheila Smith and Martha Scott.
Bottom: Diane Stevens and Judith Arcana.

An emergency meeting of Jane was called. The turnout was massive — even women who had not been active in months showed up, anxious to know the extent of the police probe, according to the women with whom CNN spoke.

Despite widespread fear and worry, the group immediately began making alternate plans for women scheduled for abortions at Jane in the next few days to weeks. The group even paid for transportation to other cities where abortion had already been legalized, they said.

News reports over the next few days gave further details of the bust: There was no widespread investigation by the police. It was a single incident, triggered by a call from a sister-in-law who was upset with her relative’s decision to have an abortion, they said.

“It wasn’t long after I was arrested that I came back and worked for quite a few months,” said Scott, one of the few fully trained to do abortions.

“I like to think I was a good soldier,” Scott said. “I like to think what did made a difference not only to a whole bunch of people, but also to ourselves. It gave us a sense of empowerment that comes when you do something that is hard to do and also right.”

As paranoia eased, women began to come back to work at Jane, determined to carry on.

“After the bust, we had a meeting and were told ‘Everybody needs to start assisting and learn how to do abortions.’ I was like, ‘Whoa, whoa, whoa!’” said Eileen Smith, who had not been arrested. “But you felt like you really didn’t have much of a choice. We had to keep the service running.”

Laura Kaplan volunteered for the Janes, later immortalizing the group in her book,

The preliminary hearing for the arrested seven was in August. Several of the women in the apartment waiting for abortions the day of the arrest suddenly developed amnesia and refused to testify. According to Kaplan’s book, one of the women later said, “The cops tried to push me around, but f**k them. I wasn’t going to tell on you.”

It didn’t matter. Each Jane was charged with 11 counts of abortion and conspiracy to commit abortion, with a possible sentence of up to 110 years in prison.

As they waited for trial, the lawyer for the seven, Jo-Anne Wolfson, adopted delaying tactics, Kaplan said. A case representing a Texas woman, cited as “Jane Roe” to protect her privacy, was being considered by the US Supreme Court. If the Court ruled in Roe’s favor, the case against the Jane’s might be thrown out.

That’s exactly what happened. On March 9, 1973, three months after the Supreme Court had legalized abortion in the US, the case against the seven women was dropped and their arrest records were expunged.

Later that spring, a majority of Janes, burned out by the intensity of the work over the last few years, voted to close shop. An end of Jane party was held on May 20. According to Kaplan’s book, the invitation read:

“You are cordially invited to attend The First, Last and Only Curette Caper; the Grand Finale of the Abortion Counseling Service. RSVP: Call Jane.”

Today, most of the surviving members of Jane are in their 70s and 80s, shocked but somehow not surprised by the actions of abortion opponents.

“This is a country of ill-educated politicos who know nothing about women’s bodies, nor do they care,” said Dorie Barron. “It will take generations to even begin to undo the devastating harm to women’s rights.”

In the meantime, women should research all available options, keep that information confidential, seek support from groups working for abortion rights, and “share your education with as many women as you can,” Barron added.

As more and more reproductive freedoms have been rolled back over the past year, many of the Janes are angry and fearful for the future.

Abortion rights demonstrators walk across the Brooklyn Bridge in New York nearly two weeks after the leak of a draft Supreme Court opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

“This is about the most intimate decision of our lives — when, whether and with whom we have a child. Everyone should have the ability to make decisions about our own lives, bodies, and futures without political interference,” said Heather Booth, who has spent her life after leaving Jane fighting for civil and women’s rights.

“We need to organize, raise our voices and our votes, and overturn this attack on our freedom and our lives. I have seen that when we take action and organize we can change the world.”

Source link

#women #ran #underground #abortion #network #1960s #Heres #fear #happen #today #CNN

Clinics and doctors brace for more restrictions on women’s health care after court ruling on abortion drug | CNN



CNN
 — 

Less than a year after the US Supreme Court ended legal protection for abortions nationwide, clinics that provide reproductive health care across the United States are bracing for more restrictions on the care they provide to women.

If a judge’s ruling takes effect Friday, it may soon be illegal for doctors to prescribe mifepristone, the first in a two-drug regimen that can help women terminate a pregnancy at home – and that has other uses.

At Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, staffers are calling patients who expected to get medication abortions next week, telling them to change their plans.

“They’re scrambling to change their schedules to get in to see us earlier,” said Dr. David Burkons, the physician who runs the clinics.

About half of abortions in the US use mifepristone, which is sold under the brand name Mifeprex.

Mifeprex blocks the hormone progesterone, which effectively stops a pregnancy from continuing. For an abortion, women take mifepristone first, followed one or two days later by misoprostol, a drug that causes the uterus to contract, cramp and bleed, similar to a heavy period. It empties out the uterus, ending the pregnancy. It can be used up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.

But the uses of mifepristone go beyond abortion.

The drug helps soften and open the cervix, the neck of the uterus, and doctors depend on it to help when women are having a miscarriage and when a pregnancy needs to be terminated quickly if the life of the mother is at stake.

In certain situations, when a pregnancy has become too risky, time is of the essence, says Dr. Alison Edelman, who directs the division of Complex Family Planning at Oregon Health and Sciences University.

“The more expediently that we can have somebody not be pregnant, the better, and mifepristone helps us speed that process up and make it safer for patients,” she said.

Doctors also use mifepristone before procedures in which they need to go into the uterus, such as to remove bleeding polyps. Studies have shown that the drug helps reduce the amount of force needed to open the cervix and reduces the amount of blood loss associated with the procedure.

Studies also show that mifepristone has moderate to strong benefits for inducing labor and treating uterine fibroids and endometriosis, sometimes helping avoid surgery, according to the American Society of Health Systems Pharmacists.

It can be used to prevent bleeding between periods and to control hyperstimulation of the ovaries during in-vitro fertilization, the society said in a statement.

Doctors say they still have other ways to treat those problems, but when considering the needs of individual patients, they will be missing a valuable tool.

“We have our gold standard of what we provide – the safest, most effective regimen – and then if it’s not available, we use the next best one. And that’s what we would be left with,” Edelman said.

Mifepristone has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for 23 years, and it has been used by over 5 million women in the United States. FDA data shows that less than 1% of women who take it have significant adverse events. A CNN analysis of FDA data found that mifepristone was even less risky than some other common medications, including Viagra and penicillin.

Medication abortions have become an increasingly important option for women in states that restricted abortion access after the Supreme Court’s ruling last year that ended legal protections for abortions in every state. They are also sometimes the only kind of abortion many women can get in rural areas that have lost abortion providers.

This ease of access has also made the medication regimen a target for abortion opponents.

“They want to see a national ban, and this is in fact what they are going for in this case,” said Kristen Moore, director of the EMAA Project, a nonprofit that is seeking to make it easier to get abortion medications in the US.

What will happen next is far from settled. Appeals have been filed to stop the ruling in Texas from taking hold, and higher courts will have to weigh in.

Even if the court does take mifepristone off the market in the US, doctors say, they will still be able to provide medication abortions using misoprostol alone.

In fact, some abortion providers have been planning on using misoprostol by itself in case mifepristone is isn’t available.

Carafem, which provides telehealth abortion care, has been offering a misoprostol-only regimen since the Covid-19 pandemic began, Chief Operating Officer Melissa Grant says.

“In 2020, we started to use misoprostol alone as an option,” she said. Workers have since been tweaking the regimen and gathering data.

“We now feel confident that, even though we would much prefer to use both, that we can use misoprostol alone effectively and are ready to switch gears to have a higher percentage of our clients or even 100% of our colleagues use that option if necessary,” Grant said.

Still, some providers said it’s not ideal.

The misoprostol-only regimen is slightly less effective than the one that uses both drugs, and it causes more cramping and bleeding, which can mean more complications.

“We’re more likely to see failures and therefore more likely to need surgical intervention after misoprostol alone,” said Dr. Erika Werner, chair of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Tufts Medical Center.

Still, doctors want women to know that medication abortions and miscarriage care will still be available even if mifepristone isn’t. And they hope that higher courts will intervene to keep this medication on pharmacy shelves.

“The clinicians would have to use these other options instead of choosing based on their own expertise, knowledge and judgment when rendering such care,” Dr. Iffath Hoskins, president of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said Monday. “Frankly, as a clinician, I do not want to be in that position.”

Correction: This story has been updated to include the correct name of Tufts Medical Center.

Source link

#Clinics #doctors #brace #restrictions #womens #health #care #court #ruling #abortion #drug #CNN

How safe is the abortion pill compared with other common drugs | CNN



CNN
 — 

A federal judge in Texas ruled on Friday to suspend the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, the first drug in the medication abortion process, nationwide by the end of this week.

The judge sided with the coalition of anti-abortion national medical associations that filed the lawsuit. He argued that the FDA failed to adequately consider risks associated with the drug, including “the intense psychological trauma and post-traumatic stress women often experience from chemical abortion.”

However, data analyzed by CNN shows mifepristone is even safer than some common, low-risk prescription drugs, including penicillin and Viagra. There were five deaths associated with mifepristone use for every 1 million people in the US who have used the drug since its approval in 2000, according to the US Food and Drug Administration as of last summer. That’s a death rate of 0.0005%.

Comparatively, the risk of death by penicillin — a common antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections like pneumonia — is four times greater than it is for mifepristone, according to a study on life-threatening allergic reactions. Risk of death by taking Viagra — used to treat erectile dysfunction — is nearly 10 times greater, according to a study cited in the amicus brief filed by the FDA.

“[Mifepristone] has been used for over 20 years by over five million people with the capacity to become pregnant,” said Ushma Upadhyay, an associate professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive science at the University of California, San Francisco. “Its safety is very well established.”

The Justice Department, the FDA, and Danco — a manufacturer of mifepristone that intervened in the case — have already appealed the ruling.

Within hours of the decision in Texas, a federal judge in Washington state issued a conflicting ruling that the federal government must keep mifepristone available in the 17 Democrat-led states and the District of Columbia that had sued in a separate lawsuit.

If the Texas ruling is allowed to take effect this week, 40 million more women of reproductive age would lose access to medication abortion care around the country, according to data from abortion rights advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America. That’s in addition to the 24.5 million women of reproductive age living in states with abortion bans.

“The court’s disregard for well-established scientific facts in favor of speculative allegations and ideological assertions will cause harm to our patients and undermines the health of the nation,” said Dr. Jack Resneck, Jr., president of the American Medical Association, in a statement. “By rejecting medical facts, the court has intruded into the exam room and has intervened in decisions that belong to patients and physicians.”

Medication abortion has become the most common method for abortion, accounting for more than half of all US abortions in 2020, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The growing popularity of medication abortion is largely because of its accessibility, said Abigail Aiken, associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin who leads a research group on medication abortion.

“It reduces the cost, it reduces barriers where people may not want to go to a clinic,” she said.

It is also a safer option than both procedural abortion or childbirth. The rate of major complications — like hemorrhages or infections — for medication abortions is about one-third of a percent, according to a 2015 study conducted by Upadhyay. That means out of more than 11,000 cases, 35 experienced any major complications.

The likelihood of serious complications via procedural abortion — performed second-trimester or later — is slightly higher than medication abortion at 0.41%, according to the same study. And childbirth by far comes with the highest risk, at 1.3%.

If access to mifepristone is cut off, abortion clinics and telehealth organizations could pivot to misoprostol-only abortions, Aiken told CNN. Although misoprostol-only abortions are used around the world, they are less effective, associated with a higher risk of serious complications and often more painful than the mifepristone and misoprostol combination, she said.

In the latest study of self-managed misoprostol-only medication abortions in the US, Johnson found misoprostol-only abortions to be a safe alternative, though less safe than using both pills. The study, published in February, analyzed data from online telehealth medication abortion provider Aid Access from 2020. Nearly 90% of 568 users reported completed abortions and 2% experienced serious complications using only misoprostol.

Mifepristone and misoprostol together is still considered the gold standard, Aiken told CNN. People who used the two-pill combination were less likely to experience serious complications than those who went with the misoprostol-only regimen.

“It’s clear people can use these medications, mifepristone and misoprostol, at home even without the help of a medical professional very safely,” said Aiken.

Because misoprostol is used to treat multiple ailments including stomach ulcers, it’s readily stocked in pharmacies and unlikely to be taken off the market anytime soon, Johnson told CNN.

However, a lesser-effective method means more people will likely have unsuccessful abortions.

“It’s possible that it might not work for some people, and it will prolong their abortions,” said Upadhyay. “Then by the time they get back to the clinic, they’re seeking abortion later in pregnancy.”

Before the ruling, 19 states already restricted telehealth abortion care, limiting access to medication abortion. Nearly half of US adults were unsure whether medication abortion was currently legal in their state as of late-January, according to a survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Experts say that confusion will only be exacerbated.

“People are not going to be sure mifepristone or misoprostol in fact, is available. I think it’s going to be confusing,” said Aiken. “As people look around for options or feel unsure about their options, they may end up delaying [care].”

Source link

#safe #abortion #pill #compared #common #drugs #CNN

Maternity units are closing across America, forcing expectant mothers to hit the road | CNN



CNN
 — 

In picturesque Bonner County, Idaho, Leandra Wright, 40, is pregnant with her seventh child.

Wright is due in August, but three weeks ago, the hospital where she had planned to deliver, Bonner General Health, announced that it would be suspending its labor and delivery services in May.

Now, she’s facing a potentially precarious drive to another hospital 45 minutes from her home.

“It’s frustrating and worrisome,” Wright said.

Wright has a history of fast labors. Her 15-year-old son, Noah, was born on the way to the hospital.

“My fifth child was born on the side of the highway,” Wright said. “It was wintertime, and my hospital at the time in California was about 40 minutes away, and the roads were icy, so we didn’t make it in time.”

By the time she and Noah got to the hospital, about 15 minutes after he was born, his body temperature was lower than normal.

“It worries me not to have a doctor there and worries me to have to go through that,” Wright said.

Residents of Bonner County aren’t the only ones dealing with unexpected maternity unit closures.

Since 2011, 217 hospitals in the United States have closed their labor and delivery departments, according to a report by the health care consulting firm Chartis.

A CNN tally shows that at least 13 such closures have been announced in the past year alone.

Services provided at maternity units vary from hospital to hospital. Most offer obstetrics care in which an obstetrician will deliver a baby, either vaginally or via cesarean section. These units also provide perinatal care, which is medical and supportive care before and after delivery.

Other services provided may include lactation specialists and private delivery rooms.

After May 19, Bonner General Health will no longer offer obstetrical services, meaning there will be zero obstetricians practicing there. Consequently, the hospital will no longer deliver babies. Additionally, the unit will no longer provide 24-hour anesthesia support or post-resuscitation or pre-transportation stabilization care for critically ill newborns.

Some hospitals that have recently closed their maternity units still offer perinatal care, along with routine gynecological care.

Bonner General is planning to establish a clinic where perinatal care will be offered. Gynecological services – such as surgical services, preventative care, wellness exams and family planning – will still be provided at a nearby women’s health clinic.

The Chartis report says that the states with the highest loss of access to obstetrical care are Minnesota, Texas, Iowa, Kansas and Wisconsin, with each losing more than 10 facilities.

Data released last fall by the infant and maternal health nonprofit March of Dimes also shows that more than 2.2 million women of childbearing age across 1,119 US counties are living in “maternity care deserts,” meaning their counties have no hospitals offering obstetric care, no birth centers and no obstetric providers.

Maternity care deserts have been linked to a lack of adequate prenatal care or treatment for pregnancy complications and even an increased risk of maternal death for a year after giving birth.

Money is one reason why maternity units are being shuttered.

According to the American Hospital Association, 42% of births in the US are paid for by Medicaid, which has low reimbursement rates. Employer-sponsored insurance pays about $15,000 for a delivery, and Medicaid pays about $6,500, according to the Health Care Cost Institute, a nonprofit that analyzes health care cost and utilization data.

“Medicaid funds about half of all births nationally and more than half of births in rural areas,” said Dr. Katy Kozhimannil, a public health researcher at the University of Minnesota who has conducted research on the growing number of maternity care deserts.

Kozhimannil says communities that are most likely to be affected by maternity unit closures tend to be remote towns in rural counties in states with “less generous Medicaid programs.”

Hospitals in larger cities are often able to offset low reimbursement rates from Medicaid births with births covered by employer-sponsored insurance, according to Dr. Sina Haeri, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist and CEO of Ouma Health, a company that provides virtual prenatal and perinatal care to mothers living in maternity care deserts.

Many large hospitals also have neonatal intensive care units.

“If you have a NICU, that’s a substantial revenue generator for a hospital,” Haeri said.

Most rural hospitals do not have a NICU, only a nursery where they care for full-term, healthy babies, he said. Due to that financial burden, it does not make financial sense for many rural hospitals to keep labor and delivery units open.

A low volume of births is another reason for the closures.

In announcing the closure, Bonner General noted that in 2022, it delivered just 265 babies, which the hospital characterized as a significant decrease.

Rural hospital administrators providing obstetric care say it takes at least 200 births annually for a unit to remain safe and financially viable, according to a study led by Kozhimannil for the University of Minnesota’s Rural Health Research Center.

Many administrators surveyed said they are working to keep units open despite low birth rates.

“Of all the folks that we surveyed, about a third of them were still operating, even though they had fewer than 200 births a year,” Kozhimannil said. “We asked why, and they said, ‘because our community needs it.’ ”

Another issue for hospital administrators is staffing and recruitment.

The decision to close Bonner General’s labor and delivery unit was also directly affected by a lack of experienced, qualified doctors and nurses in the state, said Erin Binnall, a Bonner General Health spokesperson.

“After May 19th, Bonner General Health will no longer have reliable, consistent pediatric coverage to manage neonatal resuscitations and perinatal care. Bonner General’s number one priority is patient safety. Not having board-certified providers certified in neonatal resuscitation willing to provide call and be present during deliveries makes it unsafe and unethical for BGH to provide these services,” Binnall told CNN by email.

The American Hospital Association acknowledges the staffing challenges some hospitals face.

“Simply put, if a hospital cannot recruit and retain the providers, nurses, and other appropriately trained caregivers to sustainably support a service then it cannot provide that care,” the association said in a statement. “Such challenges are only magnified in rural America, where workforce strain is compounded by aging demographics that in some communities has dramatically decreased demand for services like Labor and Delivery.”

Wright is considering moving because of the lack of maternity and pediatric care available in Bonner County.

More stringent abortion laws may be playing a role in the closures, too.

Bonner General said in a news release last month that due to Idaho’s “legal and political climate, highly respected, talented physicians are leaving. In addition, the Idaho Legislature continues to introduce and pass bills that criminalize physicians for medical care nationally recognized as the standard of care.”

According to the Guttmacher Institute, Idaho has one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the country: a complete ban that has only a few exceptions.

Idaho requires an “affirmative defense,” Guttmacher says, meaning a provider “has to prove in court that an abortion met the criteria for a legal exception.”

No matter the reason, Kozhimannil said, closures in rural communities aren’t just a nuisance. They also put families at risk.

“That long drive isn’t just an inconvenience. It actually is associated with health risks,” she said. “The consequence that we saw is an increase in preterm births. Preterm birth is the largest risk factor for infant mortality. It is a huge risk factor for developmental and cognitive delays for kids.”

Haeri says the decline in maternal care also has a clear effect on maternal mortality rates.

The maternal death rate for 2021 – the year for which the most recent data is available – was 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births in the US, compared with rates of 20.1 in 2019 and 23.8 in 2020, according to a report from the National Center for Health Statistics. In raw numbers, 1,205 women died of maternal causes in the US in 2021.

Conditions such as high blood pressure, obesity, and diabetes may raise a person’s risk of complications, as can being pregnant with multiples, according to the National Institutes of Health. Pregnant women over the age of 35 are at a higher risk of pre-eclampsia.

As labor and delivery units continue to shut their doors, possible solutions to the growing problem are complex, Haeri says.

“I think anyone that comes to you and says the current system is working is lying to you,” he said. “We all know that the current maternity system is not good.”

Kozhimannil’s research has found that many women who live in maternity care deserts are members of minority communities.

“When we conducted that research, we found the communities that were raising the alarm about this … tended to be Black and indigenous, or tribal communities in rural places,” she said. “Black communities in the South and East and tribal communities throughout the country, but especially in the West, Mountain West and Midwest.”

Haeri says one possible solution is at a woman’s fingertips.

“I always say if a woman’s got a cell phone, she should have access,” he said.

A 2021 study found that women who live in remote areas of the US could benefit from telehealth visits, which would decrease the number of “in-person prenatal care visits and increase access to care.”

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends 12 to 14 prenatal care appointments for women with low-risk pregnancies, and the study suggests that expansion of prenatal telehealth appointments could help women living in remote areas better adhere to those guidelines.

Ouma works with mothers who are typically remote and high-risk, Haeri says.

He also believes that promoting midwifery and doula services would help bolster maternity care in the US.

Certified nurse midwives often assist remote mothers who are high-risk or who decide to give birth at home, he says.

Midwives not only deliver babies, they often work with medical equipment and can administer at-home physical exams, prescribe medications, order lab and diagnostic tests, and assess risk management, according to the American College of Nurse Midwives. Doulas – who guide mothers through the birthing process – are often present at home births and even hospital births.

“That midwifery model shines when it comes to maternal care. [And] doula advocacy involvement leads to better outcomes and maternity care, and I think as a system, we haven’t made it easier for those two components to be really an integral part of our maternity care in the US,” Haeri said.

After living in Idaho for 10 years, Wright says, she and her fiancé have considered leaving the state. The lack of maternity and pediatric care at Bonner General Health is a big reason why.

“I feel safe being with [my] doctors. Now, I have to get to know a doctor within a couple of months before my next baby is born,” Wright said.

As she awaits the arrival of her new son, she feels doubtful that there is a solution for mothers like her.

“Everywhere – no matter what – everybody has babies,” she said. “It’s posing a problem for people who have babies who don’t have the income to drive or have high risk pregnancies or first-time mothers who don’t even know what to expect.”

Source link

#Maternity #units #closing #America #forcing #expectant #mothers #hit #road #CNN

Is Guinness really ‘good for you’? | CNN

Editor’s Note: Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN’s Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.



CNN
 — 

Guinness, like other Irish stouts, enjoys a seasonal popularity every St. Patrick’s Day. It has also been touted as being “good for you,” at least by its own advertising posters decades ago.

But can this creamy, rich and filling beer really be added to a list of healthy beverages? Or is its reputation just good marketing? We researched the beer’s history and talked to brewing experts and break out the good, the not-so-great and the ingenuity of Guinness.

The original Guinness is a type of ale known as stout. It’s made from a grist (grain) that includes a large amount of roasted barley, which gives it its intense burnt flavor and very dark color. And though you wouldn’t rank it as healthful as a vegetable, the stouts in general, as well as other beers, may be justified in at least some of their nutritional bragging rights.

According to Charlie Bamforth, distinguished professor emeritus of brewing sciences at the University of California, Davis, most beers contain significant amounts of antioxidants, B vitamins, the mineral silicon (which may help protect against osteoporosis), soluble fiber and prebiotics, which promote the growth of “good” bacteria in your gut.

And Guinness may have a slight edge compared with other brews, even over other stouts.

“We showed that Guinness contained the most folate of the imported beers we analyzed,” Bamforth said. Folate is a B vitamin that our bodies need to make DNA and other genetic material. It’s also necessary for cells to divide. According to his research, stouts on average contain 12.8 micrograms of folate, or 3.2% of the recommended daily allowance.

Because Guinness contains a lot of unmalted barley, which contains more fiber than malted grain, it is also one of the beers with the highest levels of fiber, according to Bamforth. (Note: Though the US Department of Agriculture lists beer as containing zero grams of fiber, Bamforth said his research shows otherwise.)

Bamforth has researched and coauthored studies published in the Journal of the Institute of Brewing and the Journal of the American Society of Brewing Chemists.

Here’s more potentially good news about Guinness: Despite its rich flavor and creamy consistency, it’s not the highest in calories compared with other beers. A 12-ounce serving of Guinness Draught has 125 calories. By comparison, the same size serving of Budweiser has 145 calories, Heineken has 142 calories, and Samuel Adams Cream Stout has 189 calories. In the United States, Guinness Extra Stout, by the way, has 149 calories.

This makes sense when you consider that alcohol is the main source of calories in beers. Guinness Draught has a lower alcohol content, at 4.2% alcohol by volume, compared with 5% for Budweiser and Heineken, and 4.9% for the Samuel Adams Cream Stout.

In general, moderate alcohol consumption – defined by the USDA’s dietary guidelines for Americans as no more than two drinks per day for men or one drink per day for women – may protect against heart disease. So you can check off another box.

Guinness is still alcohol, and consuming too much can impair judgment and contribute to weight gain. Heavy drinking (considered more than 14 drinks a week for men or more than seven drinks a week for women) and binge drinking (five or more drinks for men, and four or more for women, in about a two-hour period) are also associated with many health problems, including liver disease, pancreatitis and high blood pressure.

According to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, “alcohol is the most commonly used addictive substance in the United States: 17.6 million people, or one in every 12 adults, suffer from alcohol abuse or dependence along with several million more who engage in risky, binge drinking patterns that could lead to alcohol problems.”

And while moderate consumption of alcohol may have heart benefits for some, consumption of alcohol can also increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer for each drink consumed daily.

Many decades ago, in Ireland, it would not have been uncommon for a doctor to advise pregnant and nursing women to drink Guinness. But today, experts (particularly in the United States) caution of the dangers associated with consuming any alcohol while pregnant.

“Alcohol is a teratogen, which is something that causes birth defects. It can cause damage to the fetal brain and other organ systems,” said Dr. Erin Tracy, an OB/GYN at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive gynecology. “We don’t know of any safe dose of alcohol in pregnancy. Hence we recommend abstaining entirely during this brief period of time in a woman’s life.”

What about beer for breastfeeding? “In Britain, they have it in the culture that drinking Guinness is good for nursing mothers,” said Karl Siebert, professor emeritus of the food science department and previous director of the brewing program at Cornell University.

Beer in general has been regarded as a galactagogue, or stimulant of lactation, for much of history. In fact, according to irishtimes.com, breastfeeding women in Ireland were once given a bottle of Guinness a day in maternity hospitals.

According to Domhnall Marnell, the Guinness ambassador, Guinness Original (also known as Guinness Extra Stout, depending on where it was sold) debuted in 1821, and for a time, it contained live yeast, which had a high iron content, so it was given to anemic individuals or nursing mothers then, before the effects of alcohol were fully understood.

Some studies have showed evidence that ingredients in beer can increase prolactin, a hormone necessary for milk production; others have showed the opposite. Regardless of the conclusions, the alcohol in beer also appears to counter the benefits associated with increased prolactin secretion.

“The problem is that alcohol temporarily inhibits the milk ejection reflex and overall milk supply, especially when ingested in large amounts, and chronic alcohol use lowers milk supply permanently,” said Diana West, coauthor of “The Breastfeeding Mother’s Guide to Making More Milk.”

“Barley can be eaten directly, or even made from commercial barley drinks, which would be less problematic than drinking beer,” West said.

If you’re still not convinced that beer is detrimental to breastfeeding, consider this fact: A nursing mother drinking any type of alcohol puts her baby in potential danger. “The fetal brain is still developing after birth – and since alcohol passes into breast milk, the baby is still at risk,” Tracy said.

“This is something we would not advocate today,” Marnell agreed. “We would not recommend to anyone who is pregnant or breastfeeding to be enjoying our products during this time in their life.”

Regarding the old wives’ tale about beer’s effects on breastfeeding, Marnell added, “It’s not something that Guinness has perpetuated … and if (people are still saying it), I’d like to say once and for all, it’s not something we support or recommend.”

Assuming you are healthy and have the green light to drink beer, you might wonder why Guinness feels like you’ve consumed a meal, despite its lower calorie and alcohol content.

It has to do with the sophistication that goes into producing and pouring Guinness. According to Bamforth, for more than half a century, Guinness has put nitrogen gas into its beer at the packaging stage, which gives smaller, more stable bubbles and delivers a more luscious mouthfeel. It also tempers the harsh burnt character coming from the roasted barley. Guinness cans, containing a widget to control the pour, also have some nitrogen.

Guinness is also dispensed through a special tap that uses a mixture of carbon dioxide and nitrogen. “In Ireland, Guinness had a long history of hiring the best and brightest university graduates regardless of what they were trained in,” Siebert said. “And they put them to work on things they needed. One was a special tap for dispensing Guinness, which has 11 different nozzles in it, that helps to form the fine-bubbled foam.”

The foam is remarkably long-lasting. “After you get a freshly poured Guinness, you can make a face in the foam, and by the time you finish drinking it, the face is still there,” Siebert said.

The famous advertising Guinness slogans – including “It’s a good day for a Guinness” – started through word of mouth, said Marnell. “In 1929, when we were about to do our first ad, we asked (ourselves), ‘What stance should we take?’ So we sent around a group of marketers (in Ireland and the UK) to ask Guinness drinkers why they chose Guinness, and nine out of 10 said their belief was that the beer was healthy for them. We already had this reputation in the bars before we uttered a word about the beer.

“That led to the Gilroy ads that were posted,” Marnell explained, referring to the artist John Gilroy, responsible for the Guinness ads from 1928 to the 1960s. “You’ll see the characters representing the Guinness brand – the toucan, the pelican – and slogans like ‘Guinness is good for you’ or ‘Guinness for Strength.’ But those were from the 1920s, ’30s and ‘40s.”

Today, he said, the company would not claim any health benefits for its beer. “If anyone is under the impression that there are health benefits to drinking Guinness, then unfortunately, I’m the bearer of bad news. Guinness is not going to build muscle or cure you of influenza.”

In fact, Guinness’ parent company, Diageo, spends a lot of effort supporting responsible drinking initiatives and educating consumers about alcohol’s effects. Its DrinkIQ page offers information such as calories in alcohol, how your body processes it and when alcohol can be dangerous, including during pregnancy.

“One of the main things we focus on … is that while we would love people to enjoy our beer, we want to make sure they do so as responsibly as possible,” Marnell said. “We would never recommend that anyone drink to excess, and (we want to make people) aware of how alcohol effects the body.”

Follow CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter

  • See the latest news and share your comments with CNN Health on Facebook and Twitter.
  • And again: Most health providers in the US would advise forgoing all alcohol if you are pregnant, nursing or have other health or medical issues where alcohol consumption is not advised.

    So responsibly celebrate St. Patrick this year a little wiser about the health benefits and risks with one of its signature potables.

    This story originally published in 2017.



    Source link

    #Guinness #good #CNN

    US maternal death rate rose sharply in 2021, CDC data shows, and experts worry the problem is getting worse | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    As women continue to die due to pregnancy or childbirth each year in the United States, new federal data shows that the nation’s maternal death rate rose significantly yet again in 2021, with the rates among Black women more than twice as high as those of White women.

    Experts said the United States’ ongoing maternal mortality crisis was compounded by Covid-19, which led to a “dramatic” increase in deaths.

    The number of women who died of maternal causes in the United States rose to 1,205 in 2021, according to a report from the National Center for Health Statistics, released Thursday by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s a sharp increase from years earlier: 658 in 2018, 754 in 2019 and 861 in 2020.

    That means the US maternal death rate for 2021 – the year for which the most recent data is available – was 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared with rates of 20.1 in 2019 and 23.8 in 2020.

    The new report also notes significant racial disparities in the nation’s maternal death rate. In 2021, the rate for Black women was 69.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, which is 2.6 times the rate for White women, at 26.6 per 100,000.

    The data showed that rates increased with the mother’s age. In 2021, the maternal death rate was 20.4 deaths per 100,000 live births for women under 25 and 31.3 for those 25 to 39, but it was 138.5 for those 40 and older. That means the rate for women 40 and older was 6.8 times higher than the rate for women under age 25, according to the report.

    The maternal death rate in the United States has been steadily climbing over the past three decades, and these increases continued through the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Questions remain about how the pandemic may have affected maternal mortality in the United States, according to Dr. Elizabeth Cherot, chief medical and health officer for the infant and maternal health nonprofit March of Dimes, who was not involved in the new report.

    “What happened in 2020 and 2021 compared with 2019 is Covid,” Cherot said. “This is sort of my reflection on this time period, Covid-19 and pregnancy. Women were at increased risk for morbidity and mortality from Covid. And that actually has been well-proven in some studies, showing increased risks of death, but also being ventilated in the intensive care unit, preeclampsia and blood clots, all of those things increasing a risk of morbidity and mortality.”

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists previously expressed “great concern” that the pandemic would worsen the US maternal mortality crisis, ACOG President Dr. Iffath Abbasi Hoskins said in a statement Thursday.

    “Provisional data released in late 2022 in a U.S. Government Accountability Office report indicated that maternal death rates in 2021 had spiked—in large part due to COVID-19. Still, confirmation of a roughly 40% increase in preventable deaths compared to a year prior is stunning new,” Hoskins said.

    “The new data from the NCHS also show a nearly 60% percent increase in maternal mortality rates in 2021 from 2019, just before the start of the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic had a dramatic and tragic effect on maternal death rates, but we cannot let that fact obscure that there was—and still is—already a maternal mortality crisis to compound.”

    Health officials stress that people who are pregnant should get vaccinated against Covid-19 and that doing so offers protection for both the mother and the baby.

    During the early days of the pandemic, in 2020, there was limited information about the vaccine’s risks and benefits during pregnancy, prompting some women to hold off on getting vaccinated. But now, there is mounting evidence of the importance of getting vaccinated for protection against serious illness and the risks of Covid-19 during pregnancy.

    The Covid-19 pandemic also may have exacerbated existing racial disparities in the maternal death rate among Black women compared with White women, said Dr. Chasity Jennings-Nuñez, a California-based site director with Ob Hospitalist Group and chair of the perinatal/gynecology department at Adventist Health-Glendale, who was not involved in the new report.

    “In terms of maternal mortality, it continues to highlight those structural and systemic problems that we saw so clearly during the Covid-19 pandemic,” Jennings-Nuñez said.

    “So in terms of issues of racial health inequities, of structural racism and bias, of access to health care, all of those factors that we know have played a role in terms of maternal mortality in the past continue to play a role in maternal mortality,” she said. “Until we begin to address those issues, even without a pandemic, we’re going to continue to see numbers go in the wrong direction.”

    Some policies have been introduced to tackle the United States’ maternal health crisis, including the Black Maternal “Momnibus” Act of 2021, a sweeping bipartisan package of bills that aim to provide pre- and post-natal support for Black mothers, including extending eligibility for certain benefits postpartum.

    As part of the Momnibus, President Biden signed the bipartisan Protecting Moms Who Served Act in 2021, and other provisions have passed in the House.

    In the United States, about 6.9 million women have little or no access to maternal health care, according to March of Dimes, which has been advocating in support of the Momnibus.

    The US has the highest maternal death rate of any developed nation, according to the Commonwealth Fund and the latest data from the World Health Organization. While maternal death rates have been either stable or rising across the United States, they are declining in most countries.

    “A high rate of cesarean sections, inadequate prenatal care, and elevated rates of chronic illnesses like obesity, diabetes, and heart disease may be factors contributing to the high U.S. maternal mortality rate. Many maternal deaths result from missed or delayed opportunities for treatment,” researchers from the Commonwealth Fund wrote in a report last year.

    The ongoing rise in maternal deaths in the United States is “disappointing,” said Dr. Elizabeth Langen, a high-risk maternal-fetal medicine physician at the University of Michigan Health Von Voigtlander Women’s Hospital. She was not involved in the latest report but cares for people who have had serious complications during pregnancy or childbirth.

    “Those of us who work in the maternity care space have known that this is a problem in our country for quite a long time. And each time the new statistics come out, we’re hopeful that some of the efforts that have been going on are going to shift the direction of this trend. It’s really disappointing to see that the trend is not going in the right direction but, at some level, is going in the worst direction and at a little bit of a faster rate,” Langen said.

    “In the health care system, we need to accept ultimate responsibility for the women who die in our care,” she added. “But as a nation, we also need to accept some responsibility. We need to think about: How do we provide appropriate maternity care for people? How do we let people have time off of work to see their midwife or physician so that they get the care that they need? How do all of us make it possible to live a healthy life while you’re pregnant so that you have the opportunity to have the best possible outcome?”

    Source link

    #maternal #death #rate #rose #sharply #CDC #data #shows #experts #worry #problem #worse #CNN

    Canadian siblings born four months early set record as the world’s most premature twins | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    For expectant parents Shakina Rajendram and Kevin Nadarajah, the doctor’s words were both definitive and devastating: Their twins were not “viable.”

    “Even in that moment, as I was hearing those words come out of the doctor’s mouth, I could still feel the babies very much alive within me. And so for me, I just wasn’t able to comprehend how babies who felt very much alive within me could not be viable,” Rajendram recalled.

    Still, she knew that there was no way she would be able to carry to term. She had begun bleeding, and the doctor said she would give birth soon. The parents-to-be were told that they would be able to hold their babies but that they would not be resuscitated, as they were too premature.

    Rajendram, 35, and Nadarajah, 37, had married and settled in Ajax, Ontario, about 35 miles east of Toronto, to start a family. They had conceived once before, but the pregnancy was ectopic – outside the uterus – and ended after a few months.

    As crushing as the doctor’s news was, Nadarajah said, they both refused to believe their babies would not make it. And so they scoured the Internet, finding information that both alarmed and encouraged them. The babies were at just 21 weeks and five days gestation; to have a chance, they would need to stay in the womb a day and a half longer, and Rajendram would have to go to a specialized hospital that could treat “micropreemies.”

    The earlier a baby is born, the higher the risk of death or serious disability, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says. Babies born preterm, before 37 weeks gestation, can have breathing issues, digestive problems and brain bleeds. Development challenges and delays can also last a lifetime.

    The problems can be especially severe for micropreemies, those born before 26 weeks gestation who weigh less than 26 ounces.

    Research has found that infants born at 22 weeks who get active medical treatment have survival rates of 25% to 50%, according to a 2019 study.

    Adrial was born weighing less than 15 ounces.

    Rajendram and Nadarajah requested a transfer to Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, one of a limited number of medical centers in North America that provides resuscitation and active care at 22 weeks gestation.

    Then, they say, they “prayed hard,” with Rajendram determined to keep the babies inside her just a few hours longer.

    Just one hour after midnight on March 4, 2022, at 22 weeks gestation, Adiah Laelynn Nadarajah was born weighing under 12 ounces. Her brother, Adrial Luka Nadarajah, joined her 23 minutes later, weighing not quite 15 ounces.

    According to Guinness World Records, the pair are both the most premature and lightest twins ever born. The previous record holders for premature twins were the Ewoldt twins, born in Iowa at the gestational age of 22 weeks, 1 day.

    It is a record these parents say they want broken as soon as possible so more babies are given the opportunity to survive.

    “They were perfect in every sense to us,” Rajendram said. “They were born smaller than the palm of our hands. People still don’t believe us when we tell them.”

    The babies were born at just the right time to be eligible to receive proactive care, resuscitation, nutrition and vital organ support, according to Mount Sinai Hospital. Even an hour earlier, the care team may not have been able to intervene medically.

    “We just didn’t really understand why that strict cut off at 22, but we know that the hospital had their reasons. They were in uncharted territory, and I know that they had to possibly create some parameters around what they could do,” Rajendram said.

    “They’re definitely miracles,” Nadarajah said as he described seeing the twins in the neonatal intensive care unit for the first time and trying to come to terms with what they would go through in their fight to survive.

    “I had challenging feelings, conflicting feelings, seeing how tiny they were on one hand, feeling the joy of seeing two babies on the second hand. I was thinking, ‘how much pain they are in?’ It was so conflicting. They were so tiny,” he said.

    These risks and setbacks are common in the lives of micropreemies.

    Dr. Prakesh Shah, the pediatrician-in-chief at Mount Sinai Hospital, said he was straightforward with the couple about the challenges ahead for their twins.

    He warned of a struggle just to keep Adiah and Adrial breathing, let alone feed them.

    The babies weighed little more than a can of soda, with their organs visible through translucent skin. The needle used to give them nutrition was less than 2 millimeters in diameter, about the size of a thin knitting needle.

    “At some stage, many of us would have felt that, ‘is this the right thing to do for these babies?’ These babies were in significant pain, distress, and their skin was peeling off. Even removing surgical tape would mean that their skin would peel off,” Shah told CNN.

    But what their parents saw gave them hope.

    Kevin Nadarajah sings to Adiah.

    “We could see through their skin. We could see their hearts beating,” Rajendram said.

    They had to weigh all the risks of going forward and agreeing to more and more medical intervention. There could be months or even years of painful, difficult treatment ahead, along with the long-term risks of things like muscle development problems, cerebral palsy, language delays, cognitive delays, blindness and deafness.

    Rajendram and Nadarajah did not dare hope for another miracle, but they say they knew their babies were fighters, and they resolved to give them a chance at life.

    “The strength that Kevin and I had as parents, we had to believe that our babies had that same strength, that they have that same resilience. And so yes, they would have to go through pain, and they’re going to continue going through difficult moments, even through their adult life, not only as premature babies. But we believed that they would have a stronger resolve, a resilience that would enable them to get through those painful moments in the NICU,” Rajendram said.

    There were painful setbacks over nearly half a year of treatment in the hospital, especially in the first few weeks.

    “There were several instances in the early days where we were asked about withdrawing care, that’s just a fact, and so those were the moments where we just rallied in prayer, and we saw a turnaround,” Nadarajah said.

    Adiah spent 161 days in the hospital and went home on August 11, six days before her brother, Adrial, joined her there.

    Adrial’s road has been a bit more difficult. He has been hospitalized three more times with various infections, sometimes spending weeks in the hospital.

    Both siblings continue with specialist checkups and various types of therapy several times a month.

    But the new parents are finally more at ease, celebrating their babies’ homecoming and learning all they can about their personalities.

    The twins are now meeting many of the milestones of babies for their “corrected age,” where they would be if they were born at full-term.

    “The one thing that really surprised me, when both of them were ready to go home, both of them went home without oxygen, no feeding tube, nothing, they just went home. They were feeding on their own and maintaining their oxygen,” Shah said.

    Adiah is now very social and has long conversations with everyone she meets. Their parents describe Adrial as wise for his years, curious and intelligent, with a love of music.

    “We feel it’s very important to highlight that contrary to what was expected of them, our babies are happy, healthy, active babies who are breathing and feeding on their own, rolling over, babbling all the time, growing well, playing, and enjoying life as babies,” Rajendram said.

    These parents hope their story will inspire other families and health professionals to reassess the issue of viability before 22 weeks gestation, even when confronted with sobering survival rates and risks of long-term disability.

    “Even five years ago, we would not have gone for it, if it was not for the better help we can now provide,” Shah said, adding that medical teams are using life-sustaining technology in a better way than in previous years. “It’s allowing us to sustain these babies, helping keep oxygen in their bodies, the role of carbon dioxide, without causing lung injury.”

    Adiah and Adrial’s parents say they’re not expecting perfect children with perfect health but are striving to provide the best possible life for them.

    “This journey has empowered us to advocate for the lives of other preterm infants like Adiah and Adrial, who would not be alive today if the boundaries of viability had not been challenged by their health care team,” Rajendram said.

    Source link

    #Canadian #siblings #born #months #early #set #record #worlds #premature #twins #CNN

    Some experts say more women should consider removing fallopian tubes to reduce cancer risk | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    “Knowledge is power,” says Samantha Carlucci, 26. The Ravena, New York, resident recently had a hysterectomy that included removing her fallopian tubes – and believes it saved her life.

    The Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance is drawing attention to the role of fallopian tubes in many cases of ovarian cancer and now says more women, including those with average risk, should consider having their tubes removed to cut their cancer risk.

    About 20,000 women in the US were diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2022, according to the National Cancer Institute, and nearly 13,000 died.

    Experts have not discovered a reliable screening test to detect the early stages of ovarian cancer, leading them to rely on symptom awareness to diagnose patients, according to OCRA.

    Unfortunately, symptoms of ovarian cancer often don’t present themselves until the cancer has advanced, causing the disease to go undetected and undiagnosed until it’s progressed to a later stage.

    “If we had a test to detect ovarian cancer at early stages, the outcome of patients would be significantly better,” said Dr. Oliver Dorigo, director of the division of gynecologic oncology in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Stanford University Medical Center.

    Until such a test is widely available, some researchers and advocates suggest a different way to reduce the risk: opportunistic salpingectomy, the surgical removal of both fallopian tubes.

    Research has found that nearly 70% of ovarian cancer begins in the fallopian tubes, according to the Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance.

    Doctors have already been advising more high-risk women to have a salpingectomy. Several factors can raise risk, including genetic mutations, endometriosis or a family history of ovarian or breast cancer, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    If they accept that they won’t be able to get pregnant afterward and if they are already planning on having pelvic surgery, it can be “opportunistic.”

    “We are really talking about instances where a surgeon would already be in the abdomen anyway,” such as during a hysterectomy, said Dr. Karen Lu, professor and chair of the Department of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine at MD Anderson Cancer Center.

    Although OCRA shifted its recommendation to include women with even an average risk of ovarian cancer, some experts continue to emphasize fallopian tube removal only for women with a high risk. Some are calling for more research on the procedure’s efficacy in women with an average risk.

    Fallopian tubes are generally 4 to 5 inches long and about half an inch thick, according to Dorigo. During an opportunistic salpingectomy, both tubes are separated from the uterus and from a thin layer of tissue that extends along them from the uterus to the ovary.

    The procedure can be done laparoscopically, with a thin instrument and a small incision, or through an open surgery, which involves a large incision across the abdomen.

    The procedure adds roughly 15 minutes to any pelvic surgery, Dorigo said.

    Unlike a total hysterectomy, in which a woman’s uterus, ovaries and fallopian tubes are removed, the removal of the tubes themselves does not affect the menstrual cycle and does not initiate menopause.

    The risks associated with an opportunistic salpingectomy are also relatively low.

    “Any surgery carries risk … so you do not want to enter any surgery without being thoughtful,” Lu said. “The risk of a salpingectomy to someone that is already undergoing surgery, though, I would say is minimal.”

    Many women who have had the procedure say the benefit far outweighs the risk.

    Carlucci had her fallopian tubes removed in January during a total hysterectomy, after testing positive for a genetic condition called Lynch syndrome that multiplied her risk of many kinds of cancers, including in the ovaries.

    Several members of her family have died of colon and ovarian cancer, she said, and it prompted her to look into the available options.

    Knowing that she could choose an opportunistic salpingectomy, which greatly decreased her chances of ovarian cancer, gave her hope.

    As part of the total hysterectomy, it eliminated her risk of ovarian cancer.

    “You can’t change your DNA, and no amount of dieting and exercise or medication is going to change it, and I felt horrible,” Carlucci said. “When I was given the news that this would 100% prevent me from ever having to deal with any ovarian cancer in my body, it was good to hear.”

    Carlucci urges any woman with an average to high risk of ovarian cancer to talk to their doctor about the procedure.

    “I know it seems scary, but this is something that you should do, or at the very least consider it,” she said. “It can bring so much relief knowing that you made a choice to keep you here for as long as possible.”

    Monica Monfre Scantlebury, 45, of St. Paul, Minnesota, had a salpingectomy in March 2021 after witnessing a death related to breast and ovarian cancer in her family.

    In 2018, Scantlebury’s sister was diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer at 27 years old.

    “She went on to fight breast cancer,” Scantlebury said. “During the beginning of the pandemic, in March of 2020, she actually lost her battle to breast cancer at 29.”

    During this period, Scantlebury herself found out that she was positive for BRCA1, a gene mutation that increases a person’s risk of breast cancer by 45% to 85% and the risk of ovarian cancer by 39% to 46%.

    After meeting with her doctor and discussing her options, she decided to have a salpingectomy.

    Her doctor told her she would remove the fallopian tubes and anything else of concern that she found during the procedure.

    “When I woke up from surgery, she said there was something in my left ovary and that she had removed my left ovary and my fallopian tubes,” Scantlebury said.

    Her doctor called about a week later and said there had been cancer cells in her left fallopian tube.

    The salpingectomy had saved her life, the doctor said.

    “We don’t have an easy way to be diagnosed until it is almost too late,” said Scantlebury, who went on to have a full hysterectomy. “This really saved my life and potentially has given me decades back that I might not have had.”

    Audra Moran, president and CEO of the Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance, is sending one message to women: Know your risk.

    Moran believes that if more women had the power of knowing their risk of ovarian cancer, more lives would be saved.

    “Look at your family history. Have you had a history of ovarian cancer, breast cancer, colorectal or uterine in your family? Either side, male or female, father or mother?” Moran said. “If the answer is yes, then I would recommend talking to a doctor or talking to a genetic counselor.”

    The alliance offers genetic testing resources on its website. A genetic counselor assess people’s risks for varying cancers based on inherited conditions, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    Carlucci and Scantlebury agree that understanding risk is key to preventing deaths among women.

    “It’s my story. It’s her story. It’s my sister’s story … It is for all women,” Scantlebury said.

    Source link

    #experts #women #removing #fallopian #tubes #reduce #cancer #risk #CNN

    Only 5.7% of US doctors are Black, and experts warn the shortage harms public health | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    When being truly honest with herself, Seun Adebagbo says, she can describe what drove her to go to medical school in a single word: self-preservation.

    Adebagbo, who was born in Nigeria and grew up in Boston, said that as a child, she often saw tensions between certain aspects of Western medicine and beliefs within Nigerian culture. She yearned to have the expertise to bridge those worlds and help translate medical information while combating misinformation – for her loved ones and for herself.

    “I wanted to go into medicine because I felt like, ‘Who better to mediate that tension than someone like me, who knows what it’s like to exist in both?’ ” said Adebagbo, 26, who graduated from Stanford University and is now a third-year medical school student in Massachusetts.

    “The deeper I got into my medical education, the more I realized, if I’m in the system, I know how it works. I not only know the science, but I also know how the system works,” she said of how in many Black and brown communities, there can be limited access to care and resources within the medical system.

    This has enabled Adebagbo to connect with patients of color in her rotations. She recognizes that their encounters with her are brief, she said, and so she tries to empower them to advocate for themselves in the health system.

    “I know what to ask for on the patient side if I’m worried about something for myself. But then also, for my parents and my family,” Adebagbo said. “Because the way you have to move in the system as a Black person is very different, especially if you’re coming from a background where you don’t have family members that are doctors, you don’t know anyone in your periphery that went into medicine.”

    Seun Adebagbo presenting her poster presentation as a first author at an international symposium and annual meeting of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

    Only about 5.7% of physicians in the United States identify as Black or African American, according to the the latest data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. This statistic does not reflect the communities they serve, as an estimated 12% of the US population is Black or African American.

    And while the proportion of Black physicians in the US has risen over the past 120 years, some research shows, it’s still extremely low.

    One reason why the percentage of US doctors who are Black remains far below that of the US population that is Black can be traced to how Black people have been “historically excluded from medicine” and the “institutional and systemic racism in our society,” said Michael Dill, the Association of American Medical Colleges’ director of workforce studies.

    “And it occurs over the course of what I think of as the trajectory to becoming a physician,” Dill said. At young ages, exposure to the sciences, science education resources, mentors and role models all make it more likely that a child could become a doctor – but such exposures and resources sometimes are disproportionately not as accessible in the Black community.

    “We can improve our admissions to medical school, make them more holistic, try to remove bias from that, but that’s still not going to solve the problem,” Dill said.

    “We need to look at which schools produce the most medical students and figure out how we improve the representation of Black students in those schools,” he said. “That requires going back to pre-college – high school, middle school, elementary school, kindergarten, pre-K – we need to do better in all of those places in order to elevate the overall trajectory to becoming a physician and make it more likely that we will get more Black doctors in the long run.”

    Many US medical schools have a history of not admitting non-Whites. The first Black American to hold a medical degree, Dr. James McCune Smith, had to enroll at the University of Glasgow Medical School in Scotland.

    Smith received his MD in 1837, returned to New York City and went on to become the first Black person to own and operate a pharmacy in the United States, and to be published in US medical journals.

    A few decades later, in 1900, 1.3% of physicians were Black, compared with 11.6% of the US population, according to a study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine in 2021.

    Around that time, seven medical schools were established specifically for Black students between 1868 and 1904, according to Duke University’s Medical Center Library & Archives. But by 1923, only two of those schools remained: Howard University Medical School in Washington and Meharry Medical School in Nashville.

    In 1940, only 2.8% of physicians were Black, but 9.7% of the US population was Black; by 2018, 5.4% of physicians were Black, but 12.8% of the population was Black.

    “The more surprising thing to me was for Black men,” said Dr. Dan Ly, an author of the study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine and assistant professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.

    Data on only Black men who were physicians over the years showed that they represented 1.3% of the physician workforce in 1900, “because all physicians were pretty much men in the past,” Ly said. Black men represented 2.7% of the physician workforce in 1940 and 2.6% in 2018.

    “That’s 80 years of no improvement,” Ly said. “So the increase in the percent of physicians who were Black over the past 80 years has been the entrance of Black women in the physician workforce.”

    Over more than four decades between 1978 and 2019, the proportion of medical school enrollees who identify as Black, Hispanic or members of other underrepresented groups has stayed “well below” the proportions that each group represented in the general US population, according to a 2021 report in The New England Journal of Medicine.

    Diversity in some medical schools also was affected in states with bans on affirmative action programs, according to a study published last year in the Annals of Internal Medicine. That study included data on 21 public medical schools across eight states with affirmative action bans from 1985 to 2019: Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington.

    The study found that the percentage of enrolled students from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups was on average about 15% in the year before the bans were implemented but fell more than a third by five years after the bans.

    Now, the United States is reckoning with medicine’s history of racism.

    In 2008, the American Medical Association, the nation’s largest organization of physicians, issued an apology for its history of discriminatory policies toward Black doctors, including those that effectively restricted the association’s membership to Whites. In 2021, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared racism a “serious public health threat.”

    One encouraging datapoint says that the number of Black or African American first-year medical school students increased 21% between the academic years of 2020 and 2021, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges, which Dill said shows promise for the future.

    “Does the fact that it’s higher in medical school mean that eventually we will have a higher percentage of physicians who are Black? The answer is yes,” he said.

    “We will see the change occur slowly over time,” he said. “So, that means the percentage of the youngest physicians that are Black will grow appreciably, but the percentage of all physicians who are Black will rise much more slowly, since new physicians are only a small percentage of the entire workforce.”

    But some medical school students could leave their career track along the way. A paper published last year in JAMA Internal Medicine found that among a cohort of more than 33,000 students, those who identified as an underrepresented race or ethnicity in medicine – such as Black or Hispanic – were more likely to withdraw from or be forced out of school.

    Among White students, 2.3% left medical school in the academic years of 2014-15 and 2015-16, compared with 5.2% of Hispanic students, 5.7% of Black students and 11% of American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students, the study found.

    The researchers wrote in the study that “the findings highlight a need to retain students from marginalized groups in medical school.”

    During her surgical rotation in medical school, Adebagbo said, she saw no Black surgeons at the hospital. While having more physicians and faculty of color in mentorship roles can help retain young Black medical school students like herself, she calls on non-Black doctors and faculty to create a positive, clinical learning environment, giving the same support and feedback to Black students as they may provide to non-Black students – which she argues will make a difference.

    “Despite the discomfort that may arise on the giver of feedback’s side, it’s necessary for the growth and development of students. You’re hurting that student from becoming a better student on that rotation, not giving them that situational awareness that they need,” she said. “That’s what ends up happening with students of color. No one tells them, and it seems as if it’s a pattern, then by the end of the rotation, it becomes, ‘Well, you’ve made so many mistakes, so we should just dismiss you [for resident trainees] or we can’t give you honors or high pass [for medical students].’ “

    Seun Adebagbo, right, with the site director (second from left) and two peers on her last day of her surgery rotation.

    Adebagbo says she had one site director, a White male physician, during her surgery rotation who genuinely cared, listened and wanted to see her grow as a person and physician.

    “He has been the first site director who has legit listened to me, my experiences navigating third year as a Black woman and tried to understand and put it in perspective – a privilege I’m not afforded often,” Adebagbo said. “He made making mistakes, growing and learning from them a safe and non-traumatizing experience. Not everyone may understand the depths of what I’m saying, but those who do will understand why I was so grateful for that experience.”

    But not all attending physicians are like her “mentor,” as she calls him.

    For Dr. David Howard, one question haunted his thoughts in medical school.

    During those strenuous days at Johns Hopkins University, when all-night study sessions and grueling examinations were the norm, his mind whispered: Where do I fit?

    Howard, now a 43-year-old ob/gyn in New Jersey, reflects with pride – and candor – on the day in 2009 when he completed his doctoral degrees, becoming both an MD and a PhD.

    At the time, “I felt like I didn’t fit,” Howard said. “I’m sure I’m not the only person who has thought those thoughts.”

    Howard was one of very few men in the obstetrics and gynecology specialty, where most providers were women – and he is Black. He saw very few peers who looked like him and extremely few faculty in leadership positions who looked like him.

    “When you’re going through a really difficult training program, it makes a big difference if there are people like you in the leadership positions,” he said, adding that this contributes to the disproportionate number of Black medical school students and residents who decide to leave the profession or are “not treated equally” when they may make a mistake.

    Early on in his career, Howard shifted his thinking from “Where do I fit?” to “How do I fit?”

    He even authored a paper in 2017, published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, about this self-reflection.

    “Only slightly different semantically, the second question shifts focus away from the ‘where’ that implies an existing location. Instead, ‘how’ requires me to illustrate my relationship with existing labels and systems, rather than within them, allowing a multitude of answers to my question of ‘how do I fit?’ ” Howard wrote.

    “Despite the challenges and realities of the medical field today, I fit wherever and however I can, actively shaping my space and resisting the assumptions that first prompted me to ask where I fit,” he said. “To finally answer my question: I don’t fit, but I am here anyway.”

    The United States has made “some progress” with diversity in both clinical medicine and research – but diversity in medicine is still not at the point where it needs to be, said Dr. Dan Barouch, a professor at Harvard Medical School and director of the Center for Virology and Vaccine Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, who has been an advocate for diversity and inclusion.

    That point, essentially, would be where diversity in the physician workforce reflects the diversity in their patient population.

    “It’s particularly important to have a diverse physician workforce to aptly serve the patients,” Barouch said. “We want to increase diversity in academia as well, but it’s particularly important for doctors, because having a diverse workforce is critical for the best patient encounters, and to build trust.”

    Service to patients and patient trust are both among the cornerstones critical to the status of public health, according to researchers.

    One example of broken trust between physicians and Black patients happened in the 1930s, when the US Public Health Service and the Tuskegee Institute launched an unethical study in which researchers let syphilis progress in Black men without treating them for the disease. The study ended in 1972.

    Among Black men, “there were declines in health utilization, increases in medical mistrust and subsequent increases in mortality for about the 10- to 15-year period following the disclosure event,” when the true nature of the study was exposed in 1972, said Dr. Marcella Alsan, an infectious disease physician and professor of public policy at Harvard Kennedy School.

    Yet research suggests that when Black physicians are treating Black patients, that trust can be rebuilt.

    For instance, the impact is so significant that having Black physicians care for Black patients could shrink the difference in cardiovascular deaths among White versus Black patients by 19%, according to a paper written by Alsan while she was attending Stanford University, along with colleagues Dr. Owen Garrick and Grant Graziani. It was published in 2019 in the American Economic Review.

    That research was conducted in the fall and winter of 2017 and 2018 in Oakland, California, where 637 Black men were randomly assigned to visit either a Black or a non-Black male doctor. The visits included discussions and evaluations of blood pressure, body mass index, cholesterol levels and diabetes, as well as flu vaccinations.

    The researchers found that, when the patients and doctors had the opportunity to meet in person, the patients assigned to a Black doctor were more likely to demand preventive health care services, especially services that were invasive, such as flu shots or diabetes screenings that involve drawing blood.

    “We saw a dramatic increase in their likelihood of getting preventive care when they engage with Black physicians,” said Garrick, who now serves as chief medical officer of CVS Health’s clinical trial services, working to raise awareness of how more diverse groups of patients are needed to participate in clinical research.

    Initially, “it didn’t look like there was a strong preference for Black doctors versus non-Black doctors. It was only when people actually had a chance to communicate with their physicians, talk about ‘Why should I be getting these preventative care services?’ ” Alsan said.

    The researchers analyzed their findings to estimate that if Black men were more likely to undergo preventive health measures when they see a Black doctor, having more Black doctors could significantly improve the health and life expectancy of Black Americans.

    The nation’s shortage of Black physicians is concerning, experts warn, as it contributes to some of the disproportionate effects that infectious diseases, chronic diseases and other medical ailments have on communities of color. This in itself poses public health risks.

    For example, in the United States, Black newborns die at three times the rate of White newborns, but a study published in 2020 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that Black infants are more likely to survive if they are being treated by a Black physician.

    Black men and Black women are also about six to 14.5 times as likely to die of HIV than White men and White women, partly due to having less access to effective antiretroviral therapies. But Black people with HIV got such therapies significantly later when they saw White providers, compared with Black patients who saw Black providers and White patients who saw White providers in a study published in 2004 in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

    And when Black patients receive care from Black doctors, those visits tend to be longer and have higher ratings of patients feeling satisfied, according to a separate study of more than 200 adults seeing 31 physicians, published in 2003 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

    “There’s plenty of evidence, and other research has shown that the more the workforce in a health care setting really reflects the community it serves, the more open the patient population is to recommendations and instructions from their doctor,” said Dr. Mahshid Abir, an emergency physician and a senior physician policy researcher at the RAND Corp., a nonpartisan research institution.

    But it can be rare to find health systems in which the diversity of the workforce reflects the diversity of the patients.

    During her 15-year career as an emergency physician, Abir said, she has worked in many emergency departments across the United States – in the Northeast, South and Midwest – and in each place, the diversity of the health care workforce did not mirror the patient populations.

    This lack of diversity in medicine is “not talked about enough,” Abir said.

    “The research that’s been conducted has shown that it makes a difference in how well patients do, how healthy they are, how long they live,” she said. “Especially at this juncture in history in the United States, where social justice is in the forefront, this is one of the most actionable places where we can make a difference.”

    Source link

    #doctors #Black #experts #warn #shortage #harms #public #health #CNN

    A childbirth myth is spreading on TikTok. Doctors say the truth is different | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    Ashley Martinez has four sons and is pregnant with the daughter she’s wanted for years.

    Last month, she posted a video online imploring doctors to prioritize her life, not the life of her unborn baby, if complications arise when she is in labor and it comes down to that choice.

    The San Antonio, Texas, resident is due in May and is one of a number of pregnant people who have recently posted “living will” videos on TikTok.

    Martinez had an emergency C-section during her last pregnancy after her umbilical cord came out before her baby, a rare but dangerous condition known as an umbilical cord prolapse that can deprive a baby of vital blood flow and oxygen.

    Martinez described her last delivery as terrifying. Eight months after the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade, ending a constitutional right to abortion, she said she worries about what would happen if she faced similar challenges again.

    Since the ruling in June, a number of US states have criminalized abortions, leading to some fears that doctors would prioritize the life of the unborn child during a medical emergency.

    Martinez lost her mother to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at a young age, and the thought of her children going through a similar tragedy terrifies her.

    “Having to go into another delivery where I’m going to have a C-section, it’s scary for me,” said the 29-year-old. “My fourth pregnancy was my only C-section. I’ve always thought about not being here for my kids just because of what I went through growing up without my mom.”

    More than a dozen US states have banned or severely restricted access to abortions following the Supreme Court’s decision eight months ago. The abortion bans have led to legal chaos as advocates take the fight to courtrooms.

    Even so, several ob/gyns told CNN that a hard choice between saving a mother and baby’s lives at childbirth, like the one outlined in the TikTok videos, is highly unlikely.

    This trend on TikTok has sparked a flurry of dueling videos among pregnant women and other people. Some have posted videos telling doctors in such situations to prioritize their unborn babies first, and criticizing those who expressed a different view.

    Martinez concedes that her mother, who died at 25, would likely have chosen to save her child first if she could.

    “My mother, she didn’t have a choice, you know?” Martinez said. “The message that I want to send is just basically nobody is wrong or right in this situation. In both situations, it is a hard decision to pick your children over your unborn baby.”

    In Texas, where Martinez lives, abortions are banned at all stages of pregnancy – unless there’s a life-threatening medical emergency.

    Dr. Franziska Haydanek, an ob/gyn in Rochester, New York, who shares medical advice on TikTok, said she’s noticed many “living will” videos in recent months.

    In most of the videos, a woman appears alongside a written message saying something like, “If there are complications during childbirth, save me before the baby.” Some people, including Martinez, reference their children in their decision and even show them in the video.

    One was posted by Tuscany Gunter, 22, a woman whose baby is due in April. Abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy is illegal in her home state of North Carolina, and Gunter told CNN she filmed her message in solidarity with others who said they would choose themselves first.

    “I wanted to make it known where I stand and to stand up with other women who are getting bashed online for saying they would rather be saved first over their baby,” said Gunter, who lives in Fayetteville.

    “As a mother to three young children, I cannot dump the emotional trauma of losing their mother on them as children and expect them to cope. While I would be crushed to lose a baby, I need to think of my other living children as well … And I know the baby that passed would be safe without ever having to experience any pain or sadness.”

    Another woman, Leslie Tovar of Portland, Oregon, said that even though her state has no legal restrictions on abortion, she posted her video because she feared doctors would prioritize saving her unborn child to avoid legal ramifications in the post-Roe v. Wade era.

    “I have two other kids at home who need mom. I can’t bear the thought of my two young boys ages 6 and 4 without their mom,” she said.

    All three women said they’ve had these conversations with their partners, who agreed they should be saved first.

    Of her husband, Tovar said, “His exact words were, ‘We could always have another baby later in life but there is never replacing the mother of my boys, I couldn’t do this without you.’”

    It’s true that complications occasionally come up during a pregnancy that lead doctors to recommend delivery to save the mother’s life, medical experts said.

    If this is done before a fetus is viable – under 24 weeks – the chances of the baby’s survival are low, said Dr. Elizabeth Langen, a maternal-fetal medicine physician at the University of Michigan Von Voigtlander Women’s Hospital.

    Roe v. Wade’s reversal did make terminating such pregnancies more complicated, Langen and Haydanek say.

    In cases involving a baby that’s not viable, it could mean that even when the baby is unlikely to survive and the mom’s health is at risk, the priority will be on saving the baby due to fear of legal ramifications, Langen said.

    But both doctors say these scenarios don’t occur during the birth of a viable baby. In that instance, Roe v. Wade is “less involved,” Haydanek said.

    “We do everything in our efforts to save both (mother and baby),” she said. “I can’t think of a time where the medical team has had to make a decision about who to save in a viable laboring patient. It’s just not a real scenario in modern medicine – just one we are seeing played out on TV.”

    Hospitals have enough resources – obstetrics and neonatal intensive care unit teams, for example – to meet the needs of both the mother and the baby, Haydanek and Langen said.

    “We’re usually doing our best to take care of both the mom and the baby. And there’s very rarely a circumstance where we will do something to harm the mom in order to have the benefit of the baby,” added Langen.

    “If mom’s health is deteriorating, ultimately, she’s not going to be able to support baby’s wellbeing,” Langen said. “And so generally, what we encourage folks to do is really support mom’s health, because that’s in the best interest of both mother and baby.”

    Abortion rights demonstrators hold signs outside the US Supreme Court in Washington after the court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

    Both doctors said it’s important for patients to talk to their health care providers about their medical concerns and share their “living will” wishes with loved ones in case there are complications during labor that require partners to make medical decisions.

    However, those decisions will not involve doctors asking your partner whose life should come first, they said.

    “Before getting in a fight with your partner about who they choose to save, know that there isn’t a situation where we will ask them that,” said Haydanek, who has called the TikTok trend “horribly anxiety inducing.”

    She said it’s come up so many times in recent months that she made her own TikTok video to reassure expectant parents.

    “Please don’t feel like you have to make this choice,” she says in the video. “I know firsthand how much anxiety there can be in pregnancy … but it’s just not a situation that you’re gonna find yourself in.”

    Source link

    #childbirth #myth #spreading #TikTok #Doctors #truth #CNN