A bill to bolster protections for in vitro fertilization treatments failed in the U.S. Senate Tuesday and as the political debate plays out, a Minnesota mother hopes her experience opens more eyes to the challenges some people face in expanding their families.

For the second time this year, Senate Republicans blocked efforts to put in place a nationwide right to IVF. The outcome is likely to get more attention on the campaign trail this fall.

Miraya Gran, an infertility advocate and IVF mom from Bloomington, said she and her husband were both diagnosed with infertility. They are now proud parents of a daughter through IVF but there were many hoops to jump through.

"Infertility is a disease and like any other disease, it is emotionally and physically exhausting," Gran pointed out. "When your disease is not covered by insurance, there's a financial component added on top of it, which is equally exhausting."

She noted the couple underwent many tests, took out a second mortgage and relied on crowdfunding to pay for the IVF. Gran is now an advocate of guaranteed health coverage for IVF treatments in Minnesota.

In Congress, Senate Republicans said they support IVF but accused Democrats of a "political stunt" by bringing it to a vote. Democrats contended the outcome aligns with conservative ideals in curtailing reproductive freedoms.

The issue received renewed focus when Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump expressed his support for IVF, even though some of his voter base objects because of religious beliefs.

Gran acknowledged people have their right to their opinions about an issue but those beliefs should not come at the expense of access to reproductive care.

"It's isolating," Gran explained. "Our society has created a taboo around it for so long."

Although the U.S. Senate vote failed, Gran noted it is encouraging to see policymakers debate the topic openly. Minnesota Gov. and Democratic vice-presidential nominee Tim Walz has frequently called for expanded access to IVF, citing his family's struggle with infertility. A Minnesota bill stalled earlier this year amid debate over costs. It is expected to see another push in 2025.


get more stories like this via email

Wisconsin law bans telemedicine abortion care, yet new data show an increasing number of Wisconsinites have been getting abortion pills through shield law providers.

An 1800s Wisconsin law caused a temporary statewide ban on abortion services after Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

Jenny Higgins, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and director of the UW Collaborative for Reproductive Equity, said even after the ban was lifted in 2023, demand for abortion pills in Wisconsin remained high.

"Suggesting that even when brick-and-mortar facilities are offering abortion care in our state, telehealth abortion still is a really important service that many people in our state are taking advantage of through these shield laws," Higgins explained.

There have been about 130 orders for abortion pills per month made through shield law providers since July 2023, according to WeCount data. There have also been reports of stockpiling nationwide since the election. In a recent interview, President-elect Donald Trump said he would "probably" not restrict medication abortion pills during his second term.

With only four abortion clinics statewide, 96% of Wisconsin counties do not have an abortion provider and about 70% of Wisconsinites of reproductive age live in a county without an abortion clinic.

Higgins noted while shield law clinicians provide critical and affordable care to Wisconsinites who grapple with numerous restrictions to abortion, attempts to criminalize both providers and patients are expected, with Black and brown patients at the highest risk.

"We know historically that Black and brown women are the most likely to be criminalized during pregnancy, whether that pregnancy is ending in abortion or birth," Higgins pointed out. "I think we need to pay great attention to the ways in which some of the pregnant people with the least social power could be putting themselves at risk."

She added barriers to care must also be recognized, including distance to brick-and-mortar facilities, state insurance prohibitions affecting affordability and negative past health care experiences.

Another 1800s law could come into play under the new administration, although about 70% of Americans have never heard of it. Project 2025 directs the use of portions of the Comstock Act to criminalize abortion, while some state attorneys general have already asked courts to make mailing abortion pills illegal under the act.


get more stories like this via email

Voters across the country approved a majority of measures in November to affirm abortion rights and supporters of an initiative to legalize abortion in Idaho said they are feeling momentum.

Voters approved seven of 10 state abortion-rights measures, including in Montana. A Florida measure received a majority of votes but did not reach the state's 60% threshold for passage.

In Idaho, pro-choice advocates are waiting for approval to collect signatures on a 2026 measure which would allow access to abortion until viability of the fetus.

Melanie Folwell, executive director of Idahoans United for Women and Families, is leading the effort.

"If there's anything that was very clear in November's election, it's that abortion amendments and abortion laws -- laws that expand access to reproductive options -- do well at the ballot, even in very 'red' states," Folwell asserted.

Idaho is one of six states with a near-total abortion ban. Folwell noted her organization is awaiting approval from the attorney general's office and could start collecting signatures by the end of January.

However, unlike many other states allowing voter initiatives to amend the state constitution, Idaho does not. If approved for the ballot, the abortion access measure would mean passing legislation, which in turn means legislators could repeal it. Folwell argued it is unfortunate, when people have been telling lawmakers since Roe v. Wade was overturned about the negative effects of banning abortion.

"They've heard from doctors, they've heard from health care systems, they've heard from patients themselves -- from women who have suffered needlessly as a result of these laws -- and they've done nothing," Folwell observed. "They've had two legislative sessions to do something. They've done nothing. And we think there's an imperative to just take this question to the people."

If the measure is approved to collect signatures, it would need 6% of signatures from registered voters from at least 18 of the state's 35 legislative districts, a total of about 70,000 signatures before April 30, 2026.


get more stories like this via email

Health clinics in New England and elsewhere are coping with a sharp uptick in requests for long-acting contraceptives in the wake of the election.

Planned Parenthood centers in New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont report more than double their weekly average appointment inquiries for intrauterine devices - or IUD's - and the birth control implant.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England CEO Nicole Clegg said the organization had exceeded its monthly average for vasectomy consultations by mid-November.

"There's a lot of anxiety," said Clegg, "that people have around whether or not they're going to have access to their preferred birth control choice."

Clegg said patients are also calling with concerns about the availability of gender-affirming care.

She said the increase mirrors what the organization experienced after President-elect Donald Trump's first win in 2016, and the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022.

In New Hampshire, abortion remains accessible up to twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, but health care advocates note that state law does not expressly protect abortion rights and that anything could change under the new Republican trifecta at the statehouse.

Clegg said New Englanders are already showing a heightened interest in volunteering at health centers to ensure patients can get the care they need.

"We've had these intense fights before," said Clegg, "and time and time again the American public has stood up for Planned Parenthood and our rights. We think they'll do the same again this time."

Clegg said a loss of federal funds would reduce peoples' access to vital, preventative health care services.

The co-leaders of Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency have already vowed to cut $300 million earmarked for groups like Planned Parenthood, which they claim pursue a progressive agenda.





get more stories like this via email