PHILADELPHIA -- Reproductive-rights advocates say if the U.S. Supreme Court weakens or overturns Roe v. Wade, more women may seek abortion services in Pennsylvania.
Lawmakers in Ohio have said they intend to limit access to abortions as much as possible, and West Virginia still has an abortion ban on the books that predates Roe v. Wade - the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that says women have the right to choose whether or not to bear a child.
Seneca Joyner, manager of community organizing at the Women's Medical Fund, said if the new conservative members of the court succeed in overturning Roe, women in such states may have no other options.
"Coming across the state border to receive care provided by people that respect your choices about your life and your family will be really important to people who live in the states that border us," Joyner said.
The Women's Medical Fund provides counseling and emergency financial assistance to women living in poverty who need access to abortion services. Brandi Collins-Calhoun, senior movement engagement associate with the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, said such funds exist in many states and are playing an increasingly critical role in maintaining access to abortion services.
"They're funding the practical support for patients," Collins-Calhoun said. "They're doing their travel, their lodging and they're also doing a lot of the direct service work."
She added at least 10 states have passed so-called trigger laws - bans on most or all abortions that will automatically go into effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned.
Continuing access to abortion services in Pennsylvania also could be in jeopardy. Joyner noted the Commonwealth already has more than 1,200 pages of abortion restrictions and regulations on the books.
"So, I imagine it is actually just going to get worse; which is - I know for a fact - the intention of the law both here in Pennsylvania and in the states that border us", Joyner said.
She said maintaining access to abortion services as an issue of racial and economic justice.
Disclosure: National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy contributes to our fund for reporting on Health Issues, Immigrant Issues, Reproductive Health, Women's Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Next week, Kentucky lawmakers are expected to consider a bill that would lift legal red tape that backers say makes it difficult to open up freestanding birth centers.
The Commonwealth is among 10 states with no independent nurse midwife-run facilities that provide prenatal and birth services and postpartum care. So, many people travel to Indiana or Tennessee to give birth, said Trimble County resident Paige Thompson, who went out of state to give birth in 2021. She said her friends have made similar trips, but she worries about those in other rural counties who have no options for a natural birth in a home-like environment.
"They offer the freedom to move around during labor," she said. "They offer the option to eat and drink whenever you're hungry or thirsty. And there's also the option to birth in the water."
Senate Bill 17 would exempt freestanding birth centers from the state's certificate-of-need requirements, rules that regulate health-care facilities. The Kentucky Hospital Association opposes freestanding birth centers, arguing that hospitals are better equipped to handle unpredictable medical complications.
The bill's sponsor, state Sen. Shelley Funke Frommeyer, R-Alexandria, said people should have access to the prenatal and delivery care they feel is best for them, noting there are around 800 home births in Kentucky each year.
"I want to recognize that we are not trying to do anything so complicated, other than remove barriers to wellness," she said, "and we believe that this is a very important barrier to remove."
Thompson said more than one in three Kentuckians give birth by cesarean-section, a rate among the highest in the nation.
"I think that people are waking up to the truth that midwives and midwifery care are safer, and produce better outcomes for low-risk pregnancy, in women who want a natural vaginal delivery," she said.
Data show access to birth centers is linked to fewer medical interventions and lower cesarean rates than in hospitals, and can reduce racial disparities, including fewer low birthweight babies for Black women.
get more stories like this via email
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer recently signed landmark legislation to expand access to essential OB/GYN services across Michigan.
Between 2018 and 2022, about 19 mothers per 100,000 live births in Michigan died from pregnancy-related issues, mostly in marginalized communities. The new legislation aims to expand maternal and prenatal care.
Rep. Julie Rogers, D-Kalamazoo, a former health policy chair, sponsored several bills in the package, including one to reduce government red tape for breast milk donors.
"That required HIV testing for breast milk donors every 90 days, and to contrast that with the rest of the United States, we're the only state that requires that," Rogers pointed out. "Forty-nine other states do a one-and-done test at the onset of donations."
Data from 2022 showed white mothers having the highest number of maternal transfusions, followed by Black mothers.
A new report from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists revealed a startling statistic: More than 60% of pregnancy-related deaths could have been prevented with improved quality and safety in the maternal care system.
Rogers noted the new law mandates insurance companies to provide support for people without health coverage or access to care.
"Often times people that are not able to access primary care or obstetrics care," Rogers observed. "This would require insurance coverage for blood pressure monitors, so mothers can check their blood pressure at home."
Rogers stressed the legislation expands access to postpartum mental health screenings. She added most bills in the package received strong bipartisan support in the Legislature.
get more stories like this via email
There are growing concerns about the prevalence of Christian Nationalism, an ideology that seeks to establish a theocracy rooted in Christian principles. Research indicates that about one-in-three Pennsylvanians support Christian Nationalist views, which opponents argue challenge the American ideal of separation of church and state.
Rachel Tabachnick, an independent researcher and former political research associate fellow, said the rise of Christian Nationalism, seen during the 2024 elections, threatens reproductive healthcare access.
"This is supposed to be a bottom-up theocracy based on biblical law being enforced at the family,
church and local civil government level. So, in order for this to work, women must stay in their God given roles, which is to have children and raise her family," she said.
On a recent episode of the "(In)Accessible" podcast, Tabachnick spoke about the history of Christian Nationalism, and how Theocratic Libertarianism advocates for laws based on biblical principles.
Tabachnick said that movement seeks minimal federal government and governance based on biblical law, aiming to dismantle institutions like the IRS and Department of Education.
Rebecca Susman, communications and development director with Keystone Progress, added that Project 2025, a 900-page guide by the Heritage Foundation, is intended as a blueprint for another Trump administration. The guide covers numerous issues, which Susman argues pose threats to basic rights and freedoms, particularly reproductive rights. She added that aspects of the plan were proposed last year.
"Conservatives have already begun implementing it, with one example being the addition of an anti-trans health care rider in a military spending act that was right out of the Project 2025 playbook, and it passed out of committee," Susman explained.
Tabachnick pointed out that in the 1970s and 1980s, the founders of Christian Reconstructionism wrote thousands of pages detailing how to reshape society and government under Old Testament law. Decades later, these blueprints remain relevant, as they were designed for a long-term transformation. Like Project 2025, most Americans reject these ideas, but they still need greater exposure and scrutiny.
Disclosure: Keystone Progress contributes to our fund for reporting on Civic Engagement, Energy Policy, Environment, Health Issues. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email