Tag Archives: reproductive

This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The charges against Anna Yocca, a 32-year-old Tennessee woman who used a coat hanger in an attempt to terminate her pregnancy last year, have varied since she was first jailed in December 2015. The initial charge was attempted first-degree murder, which was downgraded last spring to aggravated assault.

But on November 12, three new charges were filed by a Rutherford County grand jury: aggravated assault with a weapon, attempted procurement of a miscarriage, and attempted criminal abortion. The new charges will replace the aggravated assault charge brought last spring.

In September 2015, Yocca attempted to self-induce abortion with a coat hanger in her bathtub in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, when she was 24 weeks pregnant. When she began to bleed uncontrollably, her boyfriend drove her to the hospital. Physicians delivered a 1.5-pound boy who had severe medical problems resulting from the premature delivery and the attempted termination of her pregnancy.

At her public defense attorney’s request, Yocca underwent a mental evaluation to establish competency to stand trial, and the evaluation found that “there is no indication that Ms. Yocca failed to have sufficient reality contact in regard to the nature and wrongfulness of her accused behavior.”

Last month, Yocca’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that bringing her to trial “makes every pregnant woman vulnerable to arrest and prosecution if she is perceived to have caused or even risked harm to a human embryo or fetus…and that the prosecution is absurd, illogical, and unconstitutional.”

Tennessee has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and state legislators have been vocal about their plans to propose more. In 2014, an amendment to the state constitution clarified that it would not protect a woman’s right to an abortion and prohibited public funding for abortion—despite that fact that state and federal dollars cannot legally be used to fund abortion. The average cost of an abortion in the state has been calculated to be $475 to $680. Clinics in Tennessee don’t perform abortions after about 17 weeks.The 2014 amendment was one of the most expensive ballot measures in the state’s history, and it also gave state lawmakers more power to restrict abortion access.

The state Legislature enacted an additional law implementing a 48-hour waiting period in May 2015. The state also passed a “fetal homicide law” in 2014, which meant prosecutors could charge women for any behavior, such as taking drugs, that might harm or kill a fetus. The law expired in July.

There are some ongoing legal efforts to roll back these measures. The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal lawsuit in June 2015 to challenge three Tennessee laws—one that required abortion clinics to meet the standards of an ambulatory surgical center, one that required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, and the 48-hour waiting period. A federal judge blocked the ambulatory surgical center law after CRR filed its lawsuit last year.

“The cumulative effect of these restrictions is to make it very difficult for women in these parts of the state to access abortion and to create huge delays in women’s abortion care,” Stephanie Toti, senior legal counsel for CRR said. “It is a lesson that we have learned all around the world that when women don’t have adequate access to safe abortion care, they turn to other means.”

Yocca’s new court date to face these charges is November 28.

Read this article:  

This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

Texas is still gunning for your reproductive rights

y’all things considered

Texas is still gunning for your reproductive rights

By on Aug 18, 2016Share

One might think that when the U.S. Supreme Court sends a clear message — like, “no, it’s still not at all chill to mess around with a woman’s right to a safe and legal abortion” — state legislatures would take that and run with it. But this is America! And never one to be bossed around, Texas continues to try to flout the June Supreme Court ruling that reaffirmed Roe v. Wade.

As we’ve established before, reproductive rights are a key sustainability issue. Around the world, women are disproportionately threatened by climate change. Ensuring that women are able to decide when, how, and even whether to have children is pretty much the best means of empowering them to face the coming challenges.

And that means keeping a close eye on what’s going on with those rights in Texas, both our third-most populous state and one severely threatened by climate change (being both southern and coastal), where an antiquated-at-best, misogynistic-at-worst mentality still holds sway with way too many legislators.

The Supreme Court ruled in June that Texas’ highly restrictive abortion clinic regulations (known as HB2) were unconstitutional. The rules, which required facilities that provide abortions to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers, would have closed all but eight abortion clinics in the entire state.

The court ruling was a wonderful moment for the pro-choice movement — and, indeed, for women in general. But as we wrote at the time, it only addressed part of the problem. Since 2011, Texas women have had to endure a slew of restrictive legislation surrounding their reproductive rights. June’s ruling, while a promising step in the right direction, may have intensified that flood.

In July, Gov. Greg Abbott published new rules regarding the disposal of fetal remains, dictating that they would have to be cremated or buried to “affirm the value and dignity of all life,” as Texas Monthly reported. The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) then awarded a massive contract to an anti-abortion organization as a provider in the state’s already much-weakened Healthy Texas Women program, which is the state’s publicly funded healthcare program for low-income women.

As the Houston Chronicle reported, $1.6 million of the meager $18 million chunk of state cash for the Texas Healthy Women program this year will go to the Heidi Group — an organization behind “crisis pregnancy centers” that work to steer pregnant women in need away from abortions. As Nancy Cardenas with the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health puts it: “The Heidi Group does not provide health services.”

And yet its share of program funding is now the second-largest (after the Harris County Public Health Department). That’s more or less the equivalent of asking your weed dealer to take over the legal team handling your divorce.

We asked the HHSC why, exactly, it provided this contract to the Heidi Group, and got the following response:

“The Heidi Group has partnered with healthcare providers across the state to offer quality women’s healthcare services including family planning and birth control. The group’s proposal was one of the most comprehensive of any of the applicants that applied for the grants. The group’s services will cover more than 60 counties in seven regions through approximately 20 clinic sites. The Heidi Group is a Medicaid provider.”

That doesn’t assuage the concern of activists like Cardenas, who told me: “If we just look at basic facts, they are not licensed medical providers. [The Heidi Group’s founder] Carol Everett has a history of being very disingenuous when it comes to reproductive health access.”

Everett has publicly made the following claims: 1) That she can’t condone “killing babies” after “coming to Christ”; 2) that disposal of fetal tissue could disseminate HIV and other STDs into the water supply; and 3) that abortion  in the United States is a profit-based industry that attempts to trick young girls into getting knocked up. She actively and destructively spreads misinformation about reproductive health.

The Heidi Group’s inexplicable role in Texas’ public health program is a slap in the face to both women’s rights and sustainability. The women who will be most disadvantaged by the decimation of reproductive health services are exactly those most affected by climate change (which, let’s remember, is already hitting Texas hard): low-income women, women of color, and women in rural areas.

“We have to keep in mind that when cuts are made to reproductive healthcare services, they don’t affect groups the same way,” Cardenas told me. “And this rings especially true when we’re talking about the Latinx community in Texas.”

Latina women in Texas suffer from some of the highest rates of cervical cancer in the nation. And regular gynecological exams and cervical cancer screenings are some of the invaluable reproductive health services that end up falling by the wayside when money allotted for public health is given to an organization that traffics in ideology instead.

Says Cardenas: “I think the state is angry. I think our governor is angry … [and] I think they are trying to overcompensate at this point.”

The Supreme Court decision was a boon for women in Texas by saving them from having just a handful of abortion providers sprinkled across the largest state in the lower 48. But as events of this summer have shown, it’s hardly been a solution to all their problems.

The obstacles that Texas has hurled in the way of reproductive healthcare access are not dissimilar to a herd of raccoons: Even if you (say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg) can pick one off with a shotgun, there are plenty more to hurl garbage around your yard.

ShareElection Guide ★ 2016Making America Green AgainOur experts weigh in on the real issues at stake in this electionGet Grist in your inbox

Visit link – 

Texas is still gunning for your reproductive rights

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Texas is still gunning for your reproductive rights

The Unexpected Revolution That’s Killing Off Draconian Abortion Restrictions

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The 5-3 Supreme Court decision that decimated Texas’ HB 2 and established that admitting privileges and ambulatory surgical center requirements qualify as undue burdens on a woman’s right to an abortion has led to a flurry of activity across the country in reproductive rights.

Beginning in Texas a few days after the high court’s ruling, the Department of Health released statistics on abortion rates for the year after the Legislature enacted the HB 2 restrictions in 2013, which showed a 14 percent drop in the number of procedures in 2014—the steepest drop in at least eight years. The agency, which is not required to release abortion statistics but has done so annually, came under scrutiny amid accusations from the American Civil Liberties Union that it delayed releasing the numbers even after the data was finalized to conceal the impact of HB 2.

Lt. Governor Dan Patrick expressed his satisfaction with the findings in a radio interview Thursday.

“You see the Wendy Davis crowd, the abortion crowd, and the ACLU decrying these numbers. ‘How terrible this is!’ How terrible? Everyone, even if you’re pro-choice, you ought to be celebrating life. There are about 10,000 to 12,000 two- and three-year-olds running around today acting like two- and three-year-olds act because of this legislation,” he said. “Our true purpose was to make sure the environments were safe for women, but obviously, if you end up as a result having fewer abortions and saving lives, that’s something that everyone should celebrate.”

The law closed more than half the clinics in the state. A report by the Texas Policy Evaluation Project found that after HB 2 passed, the number of women who self-induced rose dramatically—as many as 240,000 women between the ages of 18 and 49 tried to terminate their pregnancies on their own.

Today in Louisiana, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a lawsuit challenging all seven abortion restrictions passed in the state this year.

“Louisiana politicians are trying to do what the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled decisively they cannot, burying women’s right to safe and legal abortion under an avalanche of unjustified and burdensome restrictions,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. She described the laws as creating “a web of red tape that women and their doctors cannot hope to escape, driving safe and legal care out of reach for many Louisiana women and putting their health and well-being at risk.”

The state passed the highest number of abortion restrictions in the country this year, affecting nearly every aspect of reproductive health care. One law would triple the waiting time between a consultation with a physician and the actual procedure from 24 hours to 72 hours; another would ban dilation and evacuation, the most common procedure for second-trimester abortions; another banned abortion in cases of fetal genetic abnormalities, and required cremation or burial of aborted fetal tissue. Still another proposal blocked state spending in the form of Medicaid dollars at clinics that perform abortions, such as Planned Parenthood. The state also has a law that imposes new credentialing requirements on abortion providers—they must be board-certified in family medicine or obstetrics and gynecology, or resident trainees under the supervision of a physician who has such credentials. According to the complaint, if a provider collects reimbursement for the costs of collecting and storing fetal tissue from abortions for medical research, he or she could face “a term of decades of imprisonment at hard labor.”

In Florida, Federal District Judge Robert Hinkle ruled Thursday night to put key portions of a new omnibus law on hold that would block public funding for Planned Parenthood and increase inspection requirements of medical records. The ruling came only a few hours before the law was set to go into effect. Planned Parenthood officials estimated that the measure would have cost them about $500,000 in public funding. Hinkle also ruled against a requirement of annual state inspections of the medical records for half of all clinic patients, which Planned Parenthood estimated to be about 35,000 people per year.

The ruling, however, kept in place a measure redefining the third trimester as “the period of time from the beginning of the 24th week of gestation through birth,” which in effect shortened the period during which a woman can legally have the procedure done.

“We will not stop fighting until every person has access to the health care they need and deserve, and until the law guarantees it,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, in a statement regarding the Florida ruling. “A growing number of young people are fighting for justice in this country. There is power in our movement. We have reached the tipping point, and we are not going back.”

View original post here: 

The Unexpected Revolution That’s Killing Off Draconian Abortion Restrictions

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Unexpected Revolution That’s Killing Off Draconian Abortion Restrictions

This Court Ruling Brings Another State Down to One Abortion Clinic

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on Wednesday upheld a Texas-style law requiring all abortion providers in Louisiana to have admitting privileges with local hospitals.

The now-active law will shutter three of the four clinics left in Louisiana. This means that for many women, the closest option will be the clinic in Jackson, Mississippi, which is the only clinic remaining in Mississippi, where strict abortion regulations took the number of clinics from 14 in 1981 to just 1 in 2012.

The Louisiana law, which was signed by Gov. Bobby Jindal in 2014, requires physicians who perform abortions to have “active admitting privileges at a hospital that is located not further than thirty miles from the location at which the abortion in performed.” Texas’ omnibus anti-abortion law from 2013, which is getting a hearing in front of the Supreme Court next week, included a similar provision. And the 2013 admitting privileges law in Mississippi was responsible for closing all but one clinic in the state.

The Center for Reproductive Rights, along with Louisiana women’s health care providers, announced their intent to fight Wednesday’s court decision, which overturned a lower court ruling to block the law, by appealing to the Supreme Court.

“Today’s ruling thrusts Louisiana into a reproductive health care crisis, where women will face limited safe and legal options when they’ve made the decision to end a pregnancy,” said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “We will immediately seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court so these clinics are able to reopen and continue serving the women of Louisiana.”

Visit site: 

This Court Ruling Brings Another State Down to One Abortion Clinic

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Court Ruling Brings Another State Down to One Abortion Clinic

The Oklahoma Supreme Court Gave a Bizarre Explanation for Restricting the Abortion Pill

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld restrictions on the abortion pill, but the justices also noted that “by the state’s own evidentiary materials, more restrictions on abortions result in higher complication rates and in decreased women’s safety.”

Since the Food and Drug Administration gave its approval to mifepristone—a.k.a. the abortion pill—in 2000, more than 2 million women have ended their pregnancies using medication alone. The law in question, which went into effect in 2014, requires physicians to abide by a decade-old FDA protocol when administering abortion medication. That protocol includes high dosages of abortion drugs (mifepristone is one of two drugs used) and three visits to the doctor’s office—requirements that medical experts describe as unnecessary, as well as less effective and more expensive than the off-label use of these drugs. The FDA protocol also makes the medication harder to tolerate—failure rates more than double compared with those from off-label use, and almost every woman experiences at least one severe side effect like nausea, vomiting, or cramps.

That’s why, when prescribing abortion medication, over 80 percent of physicians follow an off-label method, developed by medical organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and supported by the World Health Organization. That regimen has fewer side effects and a lower failure rate than the FDA method. And it can be used later in pregnancy: Physicians typically prescribe abortion drugs until the ninth week of pregnancy, while the FDA regimen can only be used until the seventh week.

Abortion rights groups, including the Center for Reproductive Rights and the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, sued Oklahoma in 2014, arguing that the law ignores medical evidence and harms women.

The court on Tuesday ultimately upheld the law and ruled that it doesn’t violate the constitution, even though it’s bad public health. And one justice, Douglas Combs, wrote an opinion in which he concurred with the court but questioned the law.

“Once again, those who do not practice medicine have determined to insert themselves between physicians and their patients, with the insistence they know what is best when it comes to the standard of care,” wrote Combs. “The medical community should take heed: now that the Legislature has declared itself willing to dictate medical protocol and practice within this limited context, what areas of the practice of medicine are next?”

Read article here:

The Oklahoma Supreme Court Gave a Bizarre Explanation for Restricting the Abortion Pill

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Oklahoma Supreme Court Gave a Bizarre Explanation for Restricting the Abortion Pill

This Year, States Took the War on Uteruses to the Next Level

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Reproductive rights took a beating in 2015. According to a year-end report released by the Center for Reproductive Rights, nearly 400 anti-abortion bills were introduced across the country in 2015, up from 335 provisions introduced in 2014. The bills ranged from regulation of medication abortions to all-out bans on the most common method of second-trimester abortions, and the Guttmacher Institute reports 57 of them were enacted. The few pieces of good news can be found in access to contraceptives: Oregon became the first state this year to expand access to birth control medication by offering it over the counter for up to a year’s supply, and California passed a law that allows women to get birth control directly from a pharmacist.

In the final days of 2015, Gov. Cuomo in New York signed legislation that permits pregnant women to enroll in the state’s health insurance exchange at any point during the year by making pregnancy a “qualifying life event.” For everyone without a qualifying life event, enrollment is only available from October through December. New York is the first state to pass such legislation.

But generally, the good news has been limited. Here are some of the most impactful state restrictions that became law this year—and that are likely to affect millions of women of reproductive age:

Medication abortion restrictions: Arkansas’ HB 1578 requires providers to tell patients that the effects of the “abortion pill“—a drug called mifepristone, or RU-486, which is used in conjunction with another pill that is taken at home—can be reversed. This claim has been refuted by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and in medical studies. In the same measure, abortion counselors are required to include in their sessions inaccurate information about fetal pain during the procedure and women’s mental health problems after it. Multiple studies have debunked the claim that most women regret their abortions after the fact.

The state Legislature in Arkansas, which was ranked the second-worst state for women’s and children’s well-being by the Center for Reproductive Rights for its mass of restrictions this year, also passed laws banning telemedicine when it’s used for medication abortion. The technology—involving video conferencing and an automated drawer that pops out and contains the medication—has allowed physicians to administer mifepristone remotely. This method is particularly beneficial for women who live in rural parts of the state and cannot afford the time or money to drive to a clinic in a metropolitan area.

Arkansas implemented an additional restriction on medication abortion that requires doctors prescribing mifepristone to adhere to the original FDA-approved dosage. This sounds reasonable, but it actually decreases the effectiveness of the drug and increases the likelihood of nasty side effects. (Molly Redden reported on increased restrictions around medication abortion in Mother Jones‘ September/October issue.) Idaho also passed laws banning telemedicine specifically when it’s used for medication abortions by requiring physicians to be physically present while administering mifepristone. Doctors who administer the medication must also have admitting privileges at local hospitals or a written transfer agreement with another doctor who does have those privileges. These requirements often disqualify physicians from being able to offer abortion services.

Unprecedented bans against the most common procedure for second-trimester abortions: In April, Kansas passed legislation that made it the first state to explicitly restrict the most common procedure for second-trimester abortions. The wording of the law is ambiguous and does not use medical language—for example, it refers to the fetus as an “unborn child”—and it bans what is referred to as “dismemberment abortion.” In the law, the procedure is defined as “knowingly dismembering a living unborn child and extracting such unborn child one piece at a time from the uterus.” The focus of the law appears to be on the use of the dilation and evacuation method, a method considered by medical professionals to be the safest way to terminate a pregnancy, and which is used in most abortions after the 12th week of pregnancy. A Kansas district court judge, Larry Hendricks, blocked the law less than a week before it was to take effect, and the Kansas Court of Appeals heard oral arguments regarding the law’s constitutionality in early December. However, because the case is being presented before all the appeals judges rather than the traditional three-judge panel, the timing for a final ruling is uncertain.

Oklahoma passed a similar law targeting dilation and evacuation abortions, using even more gruesome language. The law defines “dismemberment abortion”—a popular term among “right to life” advocates—as ” purposely dismembering a living unborn child and extracting him or her one piece at a time from the uterus through use of clamps, grasping forceps, tongs, scissors or similar instruments that, through the convergence of two rigid levers, slice, crush, and/or grasp a portion of the unborn child’s body to cut or rip it off.” A temporary injunction in October was also applied by a judge in this case, and the law is pending a final ruling.

Waiting periods: North Carolina extended the waiting period from 24 hours to 72 hours, tripling the time between state-mandated abortion counseling and actually receiving an abortion. All 12 states in the Southeast have state laws that mandate a waiting period, with the exception of Florida, which tried to pass a 24-hour waiting period this year, but the law was blocked by a circuit court judge and is pending a final ruling. Oklahoma also passed a law that expanded the state’s 24-hour mandatory waiting period to 72 hours.

Tennessee Legislature scales back abortion access: Amendment One, which passed in late 2014, amended the Tennessee state constitution to declare that it does not protect a woman’s right to an abortion or funding for abortions (despite the well-known fact that state and federal dollars cannot legally be used to fund abortion, anyway). The amendment, which was one of the most expensive ballot measures in the state’s history, gave state lawmakers more power to control abortion access and opened the door to a number of restrictive measures in 2015. Twelve bills restricting abortion access were presented before the Legislature this year, including a mandatory 48-hour waiting period. Also in Tennessee, a woman who attempted to self-induce a miscarriage in her bathtub after 24 weeks of pregnancy now faces a first-degree attempted murder charge.

Less than six months after Amendment One was approved, Tennessee also passed a law requiring clinics performing more than 50 surgical abortion procedures per year to meet standards of ambulatory surgery center, which basically amount to hospital standards. This is an example of a TRAP law (short for Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers), which focus not on women seeking abortions but on the practitioners who provide them. The additional construction, infrastructure, and maintenance costs can bankrupt these providers, as Mother Jones has previously reported.

Parental consent: By adding yet another requirement, Arkansas’ lawmakers tightened restrictions for women under the age of 18 who are seeking an abortion without parental consent. In order to waive the state’s parental-consent requirement, these young women must go through a judicial bypass procedure in which they appear before a judge to receive permission to have the procedure. But they now must also undergo an “evaluation and counseling session with a mental health professional” so that a judge can rule whether there is “clear and convincing evidence” that a minor is mature enough for the procedure and that an abortion is in her best interests. The law does not mandate any kind of time limit on the court proceedings, so it’s possible a slow-moving petition could delay a teen’s pregnancy until it is illegal for her to go through with the abortion. The law also requires that a minor file the petition in a court in the county where she resides, further compromising her privacy.

Ban after 20 weeks: This year, West Virginia became the 15th state to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Although the governor vetoed the legislation, the state Legislature overrode his veto and passed the bill into law. The law is especially restrictive, offering no exceptions for victims of rape or incest, and it only provides a highly limited exception for women whose lives are endangered by their pregnancy or for fetal abnormalities. Arkansas lawmakers passed a similar ban on abortions after 12 weeks, but the measure was struck down in the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. “By banning abortions after 12 weeks’ gestation, the act prohibits women from making the ultimate decision to terminate a pregnancy at a point before viability,” the appeals court said.

Elizabeth Nash, a state policy analyst at the Guttmacher Institute, said that even though 2015 was a tough year, it could get worse in 2016. “In 2016, abortion restrictions are again expected to be on the front burner in many state legislatures,” Nash said. “It does not appear that the pending US Supreme Court case is slowing down abortion opponents. We expect to see a host of abortion restrictions in 2016, including restrictions related to medication abortion, bans on abortion in the second trimester and TRAP laws including the disposal of aborted tissue.”

From:  

This Year, States Took the War on Uteruses to the Next Level

Posted in Anchor, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Year, States Took the War on Uteruses to the Next Level