The (Jeffersonville) News and Tribune
As we celebrate Women’s History Month in March, Hoosier women are certainly justified in questioning why their health has historically been an afterthought or a political tool for lawmakers.
Indiana’s maternal mortality rate has consistently been among the worst in the nation. With most forms of abortion banned in the state, it’s even more important that women and mothers are provided with excellent health care, safe contraceptives and wellness education.
Yet some with the power to make a difference still resist, even when common sense and data show their claims are misguided.
State Rep. Rita Fleming, D-Jeffersonville, a retired OB/GYN, has led efforts to protect mothers and to provide women with birth control access and education. Last year, a bill she sponsored allowing pharmacists to prescribe hormonal birth control was approved with bipartisan support.
This session, Fleming’s House Bill 1426 seeks to increase access to long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) for Medicaid recipients. The bill stalled after Republicans balked at the inclusion of intrauterine devices (IUD), falsely claiming that such contraceptives cause abortions. Republicans ultimately stripped that option from the bill in committee.
Some Democrats and health institutions such as the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology switched course and quit supporting the legislation as a result of the IUD removal.
Fleming, likely the only lawmaker voting on the bill who has delivered a baby, rightfully questioned the logic of both sides.
Last week, after much debate, the bill was approved and heads to Gov. Eric Holcomb for consideration. He should sign it into law.
The bill is particularly aimed at providing options to mothers during the important postpartum period. Many lower income and young mothers never return for follow-up visits. This bill would require doctors to instruct their patients about contraceptive options during the critical hours after delivery before discharge – possibly the only time they’ll get the opportunity.
As Fleming points out in an op-ed, removing the requirement to discuss IUDs as a contraceptive option doesn’t mean hospitals can’t offer IUD implants.
In the same op-ed, she details her experiences in the delivery room and how IUDs aren’t always a good option for a mother.
She also responds to the lack of support from medical organizations including the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, pointing out that “It’s on your watch, for the past decades, that maternal and infant mortality has climbed, that more children are born addicted, that sexually transmitted diseases are affecting newborns in record numbers. Whatever you might be doing about those, it’s obviously not working.”
Opponents of the legislation, following the removal of IUDs from the language, have suggested that the bill really doesn’t accomplish much, and that medical providers “could” still tell mothers about contraceptive options without a new requirement.
We all know there’s a big difference between “could” and “will.”
We could do something this March to help mothers and women, especially those who are struggling financially or with addiction. If not, we will continue to see mothers dying during problematic pregnancies or, along with their newborns, battling health issues that could have been prevented.
Send comments to [email protected].
