Connect with us

News

The Rise of Pregnancy Criminalization Post-Dobbs

Published

on

The Rise of Pregnancy Criminalization Post-Dobbs

At least 210 pregnant people faced criminal charges for “conduct associated” with pregnancy in the first year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade—the highest number documented in a single year, according to a new report by Pregnancy Justice, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting pregnant people’s rights.

The report, released on Tuesday, covered prosecutions initiated from June 24, 2022 to June 23, 2023, but researchers plan to document all charges of pregnancy criminalization in the country in the years since the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022. The report defines pregnancy criminalization as occurring “when the state wields a criminal law to render acts associated with a pregnancy, pregnancy loss, birth, and/or associated healthcare the subject of criminal prosecution.” Pregnancy criminalization can include abortion criminalization, but is not limited to it. The majority of the pregnancy-related charges documented in the report, for instance, alleged substance use during pregnancy.

Read More: Here’s What Harris and Trump Said About Abortion in the 2024 Presidential Debate

In the report, researchers called pregnancy criminalization “nothing new.” Pregnancy Justice and other groups have recorded more than 1,800 cases of pregnancy-related charges from 1973 to 2022, according to the report. But researchers attribute the acceleration in pregnancy criminalization in the first year after the Dobbs decision to the rise of “fetal personhood” laws, which grant legal rights to an embryo or fetus. The report found that pregnancy-related prosecutions were highest in Alabama, followed by Oklahoma and South Carolina—states that have abortion bans or restrictions.

Advertisement

TIME discussed the report’s findings and what they mean with Pregnancy Justice President Lourdes Rivera.

This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Can you talk about the types of pregnancy-related charges your team uncovered? The majority of the charges were alleged substance use—why is that significant?

That’s been an ongoing pattern since the war on drugs in the 80s and 90s—that’s been the entry point to help create this idea that there are mothers who are harming their babies. The way people get caught up is they go to their doctors to get access to care. So just imagine: someone has a substance use disorder, they become pregnant, they go to the doctor to get help, and instead  they get reported to the family policing system and to law enforcement.

Read More: How Ronald Reagan Helped Abortion Take Over the Republican Agenda

Advertisement

Opioid disorder-related deaths have emerged as [a leading] contributor to maternal mortality, and you do not address that by driving people away from health care, which is what criminalization does. All the major medical associations and public-health associations oppose criminalizing pregnant people and criminalizing substance use during pregnancy because it drives people away from health care, which is exactly what they need.

What would you say is the most important takeaway from the report?

The overarching essential finding is the 210 cases that were uncovered, which is the highest number of criminal cases documented in any single year. The other key finding is that there were 22 cases of people being criminalized for pregnancy loss, a widely shared experience. Post-Dobbs, pregnancy loss is treated as a highly suspicious event.

We were expecting to find, given that it was post-Dobbs, that specific abortion criminalization laws would be used to prosecute people. And we actually, except for one, did not find any cases to date where a specific abortion law was being used to criminalize pregnant people. 

The report mentions that four cases included allegations concerning abortion, but that the individuals weren’t prosecuted on an abortion crime charge. Can you talk about the significance of that?

There’s been a lot of focus on the direct attacks on abortion, and we’ve seen backlash to that from the American public. What’s been happening is that pregnant women are being surveilled and investigated and prosecuted—not under specific abortion laws, because I think that would be politically unpopular, but rather, they’re using this mechanism and this architecture that has been built over time that’s been more under the radar.

Advertisement

What’s driving this is this really extreme ideology [of fetal personhood] that used to be on the fringe of the anti-abortion movement, but has now occupied the center and has been embedded in state criminal and civil law—like, for example, in the Alabama IVF decision, where a frozen embryo is now considered a child for purposes of wrongful death.

This infrastructure and architecture is available for prosecutors and law enforcement to use and they don’t have to rely on a specific abortion criminal law. 

We have to understand that pregnant people are being criminalized already. And if you’re only looking for the abortion law, then you’re missing a really crucial piece of the big picture.

The report found that the majority of people who were facing pregnancy-related charges in the year post-Dobbs were white and low-income. Oftentimes experts point out that threats to reproductive health disproportionately impact people of color.

Both things continue to be true. If we look at how fetal personhood got a foothold—how it went from the fringey margins and became more like a central strategy—it was in the 80s and 90s, when we were in the midst of the war on drugs, where Black and brown communities were being targeted. And this gave abortion opponents an opportunity to create this whole myth of fetuses as separate victims of Black and brown women’s behavior around the use of substances.

Advertisement

So that mechanism was built, and now as the drug crisis has shifted to opioids and methamphetamines—which is also a crisis that is disproportionately experienced by poor white communities and people in rural areas—you then see the same framework being applied over there.

We’re still seeing Black, brown, and Indigenous women being targeted. The other caveat is that our data relies on the court records, and court records are notoriously under-counting Black and brown and multi-ethnic people.

In 121 of the 210 cases, the information that led to charges was obtained or disclosed in a medical setting. Does that raise concerns for you that people may fear disclosing medical information to their doctors or seeking medical care at all?

Absolutely, this is a huge concern, and that it is really counterproductive. Anyone who goes to the doctor believes that if they share information with their doctor, it’s going to be to the benefit of their own health care. But if you’re a pregnant person, it’s like you have no confidentiality in your medical information. You get treated very differently because of your pregnancy status in health care settings, so this is a glaring gap in patient privacy protection laws.

Sometimes this reporting happens because of bias within those health care settings, and sometimes it is because [of] hospital policy, and sometimes it is because of state law. All of that is just really misdirected and contrary to the positions of major medical associations and public health associations.

Advertisement

What can the government do to address the issues that the report uncovered?

A few things. It depends on the administration, but the Department of Justice and the Office [for] Civil Rights in the Department of Health and Human Services can investigate whether or not this is race and/or sex discrimination.

We also just have to strengthen HIPAA laws to protect patient confidentiality in these circumstances. And we also need to urge states to adopt laws that require patient-informed consent before they can be drug tested at all, or to have their newborns drug tested. They shouldn’t be punished if they refuse to give that consent. There’s so much overtesting that happens without any actual clinical need, and there are false positives—I mean, all kinds of things happen, right? And that just starts this whole cascade of state involvement in your life that could result in a family losing their children or having the pregnant person or the postpartum person be criminalized.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

News

More women accuse Leeds employment tribunal judge of bullying

Published

on

More women accuse Leeds employment tribunal judge of bullying
BBC Judge Philip LancasterBBC

Three more women have accused a judge of bullying during employment tribunal hearings.

They say Judge Philip Lancaster was belittling and intimidating and made them feel stupid while they presented their cases. One said she felt his behaviour in her case verged on psychological abuse.

The three women have spoken out following a BBC report in April in which five women accused Mr Lancaster of bullying and sexist behaviour.

A spokesperson for the Judiciary Office, which supports the judiciary across courts in England and Wales, said judges cannot comment on matters of conduct due to constitutional arrangements.

It said allegations of misconduct in court can be referred to the Judicial Conduct Investigation Office.

Advertisement

The three women all appeared before Judge Lancaster at the employment tribunal in Leeds between 2021 and this year.

‘Battered and intimidated’

In October 2022, Jackie Moore represented her daughter who had brought a case of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against her employer.

Ms Moore had spent two years preparing the case and had a number of preliminary hearings before different judges who she found “efficient and polite.”

Advertisement

However, she says none of that prepared her for the full five-day hearing she had before Judge Lancaster. She says he was “patronising” right from the start.

“He thought I wouldn’t have a clue.”

Ms Moore said the judge repeatedly snapped at her and “blocked or challenged” the questions she was asking the witnesses provided by her daughter’s employer.

She says she felt “battered, intimidated and bullied by him, throwing his weight about”.

Advertisement

When she read the accounts by other women who had appeared before the judge she realised she was not alone.

Jackie Moore has hair above her shoulders and is wearing glasses and a pink and purple top and is looking straight at the camera

Jackie Moore said she felt patronised by Judge Lancaster

Employment tribunals are specialist courts that rule on disputes between employers and employees. There are about 30,000 hearings in Scotland, England and Wales annually, mainly involving issues such as unfair dismissal, redundancy terms and discrimination. Northern Ireland has a separate system.

In April BBC News heard allegations from five other women about Judge Lancaster’s behaviour. The women, who encountered him in separate cases, said they wanted to highlight his “degrading behaviour”, including what they said was “misogyny and bullying”.

‘He made my life hell’

Advertisement

Earlier this year, another woman spent seven days in a hearing before Judge Lancaster, having brought a case of age discrimination, constructive dismissal and unfair discrimination against her employer.

The woman, who wishes to remain anonymous, says she felt “fully prepared” as she had spent well over a year working on her case, even attending other hearings in Leeds to see how litigants-in-person – people who represent themselves – were treated.

Again, she says her preliminary hearings had gone well. “Everyone allowed me to talk, nobody shut me down, nobody made me feel useless.”

That experience, says the 45-year-old, was in direct contrast to how she was treated by Judge Lancaster.

Advertisement

“He made my life hell,” she recalls. “He’d put his hands on his head, and appeared disinterested in what I was saying. He repeatedly asked why I was asking [my employer’s witnesses] particular questions and raised his voice numerous times. I felt useless.” She is now appealing the ruling.

Angela Gates stands in a kitchen smiling and wearing a patterned top

Angela Gates says she was made to feel “like a villain being prosecuted”

Angela Gates brought a case of disability discrimination and constructive dismissal against her employer in 2021.

She says a hearing in front of Judge Lancaster made her feel “like a villain being prosecuted”.

She says: “I felt I couldn’t give my side on anything.”

Advertisement

The four-day hearing was held on Zoom, and Ms Gates, 53, says Judge Lancaster regularly shouted at her, repeatedly telling her to be quiet. She says his behaviour was “appalling and degrading, verging on psychological abuse”, adding: “I don’t believe I’ve been given a fair trial.”

In his judgement, the judge said he agreed with the defence’s description of Ms Gates as “tipping into paranoia”, saying this was not a criticism of her but “a fact, given her poor mental health”. Ms Gates says she found this grossly offensive.

“He has no medical training to reach that conclusion,” she says.

She appealed the judgement but didn’t complain about Judge Lancaster’s behaviour as, like many other litigants, “you are told not to complain on the grounds of bias”.

Advertisement

“You feel it will affect your case if you get personal about a judge.”

A spokesperson for the Judiciary Office said appeals can be lodged against any judgement where a party believes there is an error of law or they did not receive a fair hearing.

But bringing a complaint against a judge in the employment tribunal system is extremely difficult. Judge’s notes are regarded as the official court record but there is no obligation to release them. Since late last year, proceedings in some tribunals have been recorded but there is also no obligation on the court to release the audio or provide the claimants with a transcript.

One of the women who originally complained about Judge Lancaster’s behaviour, Alison McDermott, believes the judicial system is totally unaccountable.

Advertisement

“I’m fed up with this nonsense, the lack of transparency and fairness in a court of law in the UK,” she said. “The whole system is in urgent need of a comprehensive investigation.”

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

No-alcohol drinks could be a tonic for NHS budget

Published

on

Banker all-nighters create productivity paradox

Lex highlights a bone of contention for those of us who have gone alcohol-free (“It is all beer and skittles in the no-alco­hol drinks space”, September 23). Despite the advances in sales and taxes levied on alcoholic drinks, there is still a negligible price difference between no-alcohol drinks and their alcoholic equivalents.

Alcohol accounted for more than 10,000 UK deaths in 2022 and 343,000 hospital admissions. Given the NHS funding crisis, a sensible measure would be to work with manufacturers and retailers to incentivise and, if necessary, subsidise the production of no-alcohol drinks to make them discernibly cheaper than alcoholic ones. This would deliver sustainable savings to the NHS budget and improve overall health outcomes.

Milo Brett
London N15, UK

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Money

Map reveals nine best places to live where salaries are higher than living costs and you can save £1,000 a month

Published

on

Map reveals nine best places to live where salaries are higher than living costs and you can save £1,000 a month

SAVING money for a rainy day or big purchase is no easy feat at the best of times, let alone when you’re battling against soaring bills with stagnant wages.

By the time food and household costs are met, many of us have barely anything left at the end of the month to save

Saving cash is easier if your

1

Saving cash is easier if yourCredit: Getty

However, if you can bring your earnings up and the cost of living down, you will start to increase your disposable income which can be used for savings.

Advertisement

It sounds easier said than done, but the cash you earn each month, as well as living costs are heavily influenced by where in the UK you live.

It means that if you choose your location wisely you can start to increase the gap between wages and costs for the better – giving you more free cash to put into savings.

There are nine locations in the UK where the amount you’re paid is on average at least £1,000 more than living costs – see map above – according to research from property site Compare My Move.

Advertisement

The location with the highest gap between the cost of living and earnings is York.

The cost of both buying or renting a flat in the historic city  is low compared to other parts of the UK, and you can get on to the property ladder for around £198,093, found Compare My Move.

At the same time, the cost of living comes in at £1,415 while average earnings after tax are £2,846, leaving £1,431 of disposable income each month. 

Even if the cost of living is relatively high, you can still save if salaries are higher.

Advertisement

For example, in second place is Cambridge where the average salary is a bumper £3,143 while the cost of living is £1,829 meaning there is still £1,314 leftover.

And in third spot is Reading with the highest employability rate of any city or town in the UK with 86.1% of its residents in employment, according to Compare My Move.

In the South East, means buying a flat is more expensive than other locations at a typical £227,525. However, the average salary is competitive at £2,909 after tax, while the cost of living is £1,714 meaning that disposable income is still high at £1,195.

Wigan, Derby, Bolton and Glasgow are among other spots where there is a sizeable difference between earnings and costs – and some of the most underrated spots in the UK for young adults, according to Compare My Move.  

Advertisement

Of course, your earnings in any location will depend on other factors such as the job you do and the company you work for.

However, you can use job sites to see advertised salaries in your field across different locations and compare with your current earnings.

Costs will also depend on exactly where you choose to live but you can use a property site to look up rent or house prices in different locations to try to gauge how to create a bigger disposable income in your budget.

Switch bank accounts for free perks

SAVING £1,000 A MONTH

If saving to buy a home is an important achievement for you, living in one of the locations on the list could help.

Advertisement

Putting away £1,000 a month after a year would give you £12,000. And after three years you could have £36,000 – enough for a 10% deposit on £360,000 property.

If you are going to start saving, it’s also important to keep your cash in a spot where it will earn the highest interest.

It’s also important to be able to access at least a month or two’s worth of income in an easy access account for emergency situations – such as a job loss.

You can currently earn as much as 5.2% in an easy access account with Ulster Bank if you have at least £5,000 in savings – you will earn 2.25% if you have less than that.

Advertisement

Or for smaller sums from £1 you can get a rate of 4.84% with app-based provider Chip.

On a lump sum of £12,000 you’d earn £580.80 worth of interest after a year at a rate of 4.84%.

Opting for as high rate of interest as possible helps you to achieve your savings goals faster. It also stops inflation eroding the value of your nest egg.

If you want to save regularly, you can rates of up to 7% with first direct. You will need to hold a current account with the bank but can then put away up to £300 a month over a year at the top rate.

Advertisement

How you can find the best savings rates

If you are trying to find the best savings rate there are websites you can use that can show you the best rates available.

Doing some research on websites such as MoneyFacts and price comparison sites including Compare the Market and Go Compare will quickly show you what’s out there.

These websites let you tailor your searches to an account type that suits you.

Advertisement

There are three types of savings accounts fixed, easy access, and regular saver.

fixed-rate savings account offers some of the highest interest rates but comes at the cost of being unable to withdraw your cash within the agreed term.

This means that your money is locked in, so even if interest rates increase you are unable to move your money and switch to a better account.

Some providers give the option to withdraw but it comes with a hefty fee.

Advertisement

An easy-access account does what it says on the tin and usually allow unlimited cash withdrawals.

These accounts do tend to come with lower returns but are a good option if you want the freedom to move your money without being charged a penalty fee.

Lastly is a regular saver account, these accounts generate decent returns but only on the basis that you pay a set amount in each month.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Myopia: One in three children are short-sighted

Published

on

Myopia: One in three children are short-sighted
Getty Images Girl doing an eyesight testGetty Images

Children’s eyesight is steadily getting worse with one in three now short-sighted or unable to see things in the distance clearly, a global analysis suggests.

The researchers say Covid lockdowns had a negative impact on eyesight as children spent more time on screens and less time outdoors.

Short-sightedness, or myopia, is a growing global health concern which is set to affect millions more children by 2050, the study warns.

The highest rates are in Asia – 85% of children in Japan and 73% in South Korea are short-sighted with more than 40% affected in China and Russia.

Paraguay and Uganda, at about 1%, had some of the lowest levels of myopia, with the UK, Ireland and the US all about 15%.

Advertisement

The study, published in the British Journal of Ophthalmology, looked at research involving more than five million children and teenagers from 50 countries across all six continents.

Their number-crunching revealed that short-sightedness tripled between 1990 and 2023 – rising to 36%.

And the increase was “particularly notable” after the Covid pandemic, the researchers say.

Myopia usually starts during primary school years and tends to worsen until the eye has stopped growing, at about 20 years of age.

Advertisement

There are factors that make it much more likely – living in East Asia is one of those.

It is also down to genetics – the traits children inherit from their parents – but there are other factors too, such as the particularly young age (two years old) that children start their education in places like Singapore and Hong Kong.

This means they are spending more time focusing on books and screens with their eyes during their early years, which strains the eye muscles and can lead to myopia, research suggests.

In Africa, where schooling starts at the age of six to eight years old, myopia is seven times less common than in Asia.

Advertisement
Getty Images Girls wearing glasses looking at a computer screenGetty Images

Girls are more likely to be short-sighted than boys, the research suggests

During Covid lockdowns worldwide, when millions had to stay indoors for lengthy periods, children and teenagers’ eyesight took a hit.

“Emerging evidence suggests a potential association between the pandemic and accelerated vision deterioration among young adults,” the researchers write.

By 2050, the condition could affect more than half of teens worldwide, the research predicts.

Girls and young women are likely to have higher rates than boys and young men because they tend to spend less time doing outdoor activities at school and at home as they grow up, the study suggests.

Advertisement

Girls’ growth and development, including puberty, starts earlier which means they tend to experience short-sightedness at an earlier age too.

Although Asia is expected to have the highest levels compared with all other continents by 2050, with nearly 69% short-sighted, developing countries may also reach 40%, the researchers say.

How do I protect my child’s eyesight?

Children should spend at least two hours outside every day, particularly between the age of seven and nine, to reduce their chances of being short-sighted, say UK eye experts.

Advertisement

It is not clear if it is the presence of natural sunlight, the exercise taken outdoors or the fact that children’s eyes are focusing on objects that are further away that makes the difference.

“There is something about being outside that is a real benefit to children,” says Daniel Hardiman-McCartney, clinical adviser from the UK College of Optometrists.

He also recommends that parents take their children for an eye test when they are seven to 10 years old, even if their vision was checked at a younger age.

Parent should also take note – myopia runs in families. If you are short-sighted then your children are three times more likely than others to be short-sighted too.

Advertisement

Myopia cannot be cured but it can be corrected with glasses or contact lenses.

Special lenses can slow down the development of myopia in young children by encouraging the eye to grow differently, but they are expensive.

In Asia, where these special lenses are very popular, glass classrooms which mimic learning outdoors are also being used.

The concern is that high rates of myopia could lead to large numbers of unusual eye conditions in older age.

Advertisement

What are the signs of short-sightedness?

  • Difficulty reading words from a distance, such as reading the whiteboard at school
  • Sitting close to the TV or computer, or holding a mobile phone or tablet close to the face
  • Getting headaches
  • Rubbing the eyes a lot

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Starmer speech

Published

on

‘There’s light at the end of the tunnel but not much else’

Source link

Continue Reading

Money

I won £166K People’s Postcode Lottery win but husband won’t get a penny… he has his begging letter written

Published

on

I won £166K People's Postcode Lottery win but husband won't get a penny... he has his begging letter written

A GREAT gran who won £166,666 says her husband will have to write a “begging letter” if he wants to see a single penny of it.

Gill English landed the cash on People’s Postcode Lottery in Rugby, Warwickshire – and is now planning a slap-up carvery dinner for her big family.

Gran Gill is left shocked by the size of the cheque

2

Gran Gill is left shocked by the size of the chequeCredit: postcodelottery
Neighbour pals Gill (left) and Pauline are planning a postcode party

2

Advertisement
Neighbour pals Gill (left) and Pauline are planning a postcode partyCredit: postcodelottery

The retired carer also said she is prepared to buy her hubby a new pair of shoes – but only once shes sees his “begging letter”.

Gill said: “Oh my God! Flippin’ heck! I’ll take the family to a carvery. I also said I’d buy Kev a new pair of shoes.

“He’ll have the begging letter written!”

Retired chauffeur Kev laughed: “I’ve already written the begging letter.”

Advertisement

The couple are both recovering from cancer.

Kev had melanoma and Gill is still receiving treatment after having part of her right lung removed.

But Gill said they are more interested in helping family – including her three sons, eight grandchildren and nine great grandchildren – than treating themselves.

She said: “I love buying presents and love doing things for people. It’s lovely when you feel you have done something for somebody.

Advertisement

“I love giving. I get great joy out of it. If you’ve got money, you’ve got it. If you haven’t, you haven’t.

“I’m not money motivated, but I am now! This is so lovely. Thank you.”

Winner’s Fear: £150k Postcode Lottery Surprise!

Gill also revealed she hadn’t told her hubby that she played Postcode Lottery until she got the call to say she’d won.

She said: “Kev didn’t know I even played; I don’t tell him everything. I hadn’t told anyone except my youngest son.

Advertisement

“I’ll never get any sleep now just working it all out.”

Kev said: “It wasn’t a secret, she just never told me.”

How to enter the People’s Postcode Lottery

  • The Postcode Lottery is a subscription-based lottery in which players sign up with their postcode.
  • Your postcode is your ticket number – 40p a day ensures entry into all drawers, or £12 a month.
  • Once subscribed, they are automatically entered into every draw.
  • Prizes are announced every day of the month.
  • If your postcode gets luck, every player in your postcode wins.
  • 33 per cent of the ticket price will go to charity that is re-funnelled back into the community.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.