Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

August-18-99

IN, AZ Sued Over Abortion Funding

The Center for Reproductive Law and Policy filed lawsuits against the states of Indiana and Arkansas Monday in an effort to force state-funding for abortions that are deemed medically necessary. CRLP is representing two clinics and two doctors in the Indiana suit, and eight Phoenix and Tucson health care providers in the Arizona suit.

Indiana currently banned the use of state funds for all abortions except those deemed necessary to save a woman's life or those induced by rape or incest. The lawsuit charges that Indiana's state constitution guarantees equal protection under the law for all persons by discriminating against women who suffer from conditions like hypertension, heart disease, cancer and diabetes. "The funding ban forces physicians in Indiana who treat low-income pregnant women with these and other health problems to deny these women abortions, to perform medically indicated abortions for free or very-low cost ... or to wait, closely monitoring the patient's health, until she delivers or the pregnancy becomes life-threatening so that an abortion is reimbursable," read court documents.

The Arizona suit argues that while the state "fully funds child-birth related costs, it routinely denies abortions to women with pre-existing health conditions." As does the state of Indiana, Arizona uses funds to covers the cost of abortions only when the pregnancy is life-threatening, or in cases of rape or incest.

CRLP attorney Bebe Anderson explained, "Some low-income women need abortions in order to prevent damage to their health. Sadly, Arizona denies needy women in these circumstances funding for medically necessary abortions ... This discriminatory treatment harms low-income women's health and infringes upon their constitutional rights"

Currently, 18 states fund abortions for low-income women who undergo them for health reasons, 13 of which are doing so only because court orders force them to.

Media Resources: Kaiser Family Foundation and Indianapolis Star - August 17, 1999


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
 
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case. UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
 
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall. The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies. Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .