Latest news with #STD
The Sun
9 hours ago
- The Sun
Nursery ‘paedo', 26, who ‘gave child STD' prompted cops to advise 2,000 kids to get tested ‘after campaign of abuse'
A CHILD from a daycare centre where an alleged paedo is accused of carrying out dozens of sex attacks has reportedly contracted an STD. Joshua Dale Brown, 26, has been charged with raping and abusing eight children aged from five months to two years old in a horror case that has rocked Australia. 2 The child educator worked across 23 daycare centres in Victoria, sparking fears that he spread sexually transmitted diseases to the young children. The parents of some 2,000 children have been urged by state authorities to test their kids for infections in the wake of his arrest. Sources told Daily Mail Australia one child who attended one of the Melbourne daycare centres where Brown was employed has now tested positive for gonorrhoea. While the Victorian government denied the claim, the Department of Health refused to reject the report. A spokesman said: "Test results we've received to date as part of this investigation reaffirm that the risk is low." Tests are ongoing after the mass panic sparked by Brown's arrest on July 1. Cops did not reveal if Brown himself had tested positive for an STI but said the manner of the alleged abuse means children should get checked. The alleged attacker worked at 23 centres over eight years from January 2017 to May 2025. Police say he carried out the abuse on eight children between April 2022 and January 2023. He is expected to be hit with further charges beyond the 73 he currently faces for sexually penetrating children, sexual activity in the presence of a child and contaminating food. 2 He has also been charged with producing and transmitting child abuse material, and sexually touching a child under 16. Brown appeared in court yesterday and will return in February after the magistrate approved a police request for an extension. Horrified parents have questioned how Brown passed screening to work with children. While he had a valid Working with Children Check, he was allegedly reported to state authorities two years ago for his behaviour, though it was unrelated to sexual misconduct. In response, childcare operator G8 Education said they would accelerate the rollout of security cameras across 400 centres. Brown was arrested after cops started investigating another man, Michael Simon Wilson, for the alleged rape of a teenage boy in a nearby area. Detectives examining Wilson's devices found material linking him to Brown and the two men are known to each other, sources told ABC. Wilson has been hit with 45 charges including rape, bestiality and possessing child abuse material. The pair are yet to enter a plea and it is unclear how they know each other. However they have appeared together in a photo shared online by Brown's partner. Brown has employed top barrister Rishi Nathwani KC to his defence, who is trying to have his client's charge sheets withheld from the media. But Magistrate Donna Bakos told him they are already a matter of public record. Cops say the majority of Brown's offences took place at the Creative Gardens Early Learning Centre in Point Cook.
New York Post
a day ago
- Health
- New York Post
Planned Parenthood wins partial victory in legal battle with Trump admin over defunding efforts
BOSTON — Planned Parenthood won a partial victory Monday in a legal fight with President Donald Trump's administration over efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation. A provision in that bill ends Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer things like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing. But U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston granted a preliminary injunction Monday that, for now, blocks the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations that either don't provide abortion care or didn't meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year. Advertisement 5 Planned Parenthood has won a partial victory Monday in a legal fight with the Trump's administration's efforts to cut funding. Getty Images 5 Protestors holding a 'I fight for Planned Parenthood' banner in front of the Supreme Court. REUTERS It wasn't immediately clear how many Planned Parenthood organizations and clinics would continue to get Medicaid reimbursements under that decision and how many might not. Planned Parenthood said in a statement after the injunction that it's thankful the court recognized 'the harm' caused by the bill. Advertisement But it said it's disappointed that some of its members will lose this funding, 'risking chaos, confusion, and harm for patients who could now be turned away when seeking lifesaving reproductive health care.' 'The court has not yet ruled on whether it will grant preliminary injunctive relief to other members,' the statement added. 'We remain hopeful that the court will grant this relief. There will be nothing short of a public health crisis if Planned Parenthood members are allowed to be 'defunded.'' The lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah. Advertisement Planned Parenthood argued that allowing the provision to take effect would have devastating consequences nationwide, including increased rates of undiagnosed and untreated sexually transmitted diseases and cancer. 5 U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani granted a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocks the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations. Getty Images 'With no reason other than plain animus, the law will prevent Planned Parenthood Members from providing vital — indeed, lifesaving — care to more than one million patients,' they wrote. 'This statute is unconstitutional and will inflict irreparable harm on Planned Parenthood Members and their patients.' Lawyers for the government argued in court documents that the bill 'stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion.' Advertisement 'All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent,' the government wrote in its opposition to the motion. 5 Planned Parenthood filed the lawsuit earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Getty Images 5 It wasn't immediately clear how many Planned Parenthood organizations and clinics would continue to get Medicaid reimbursements under that decision and how many might not. Getty Images The government added that the plaintiffs 'now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. … That request is legally groundless.' Hours after the lawsuit was filed, Talwani issued a temporary restraining order that prevented the government from enforcing the cuts. That order had been set to expire Monday.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Planned Parenthood wins partial victory in legal fight with Trump administration over funding cuts
BOSTON (AP) — Planned Parenthood won a partial victory Monday in a legal fight with President Donald Trump's administration over efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation. A provision in that bill ends Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer things like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing. But U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston granted a preliminary injunction Monday that, for now, blocks the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations that either don't provide abortion care or didn't meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year. It wasn't immediately clear how many Planned Parenthood organizations and clinics would continue to get Medicaid reimbursements under that decision and how many might not. Planned Parenthood said in a statement after the injunction that it's thankful the court recognized 'the harm' caused by the bill. But it said it's disappointed that some of its members will lose this funding, 'risking chaos, confusion, and harm for patients who could now be turned away when seeking lifesaving reproductive health care.' 'The court has not yet ruled on whether it will grant preliminary injunctive relief to other members,' the statement added. "We remain hopeful that the court will grant this relief. There will be nothing short of a public health crisis if Planned Parenthood members are allowed to be 'defunded.'' The lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah. Planned Parenthood argued that allowing the provision to take effect would have devastating consequences nationwide, including increased rates of undiagnosed and untreated sexually transmitted diseases and cancer. 'With no reason other than plain animus, the law will prevent Planned Parenthood Members from providing vital — indeed, lifesaving — care to more than one million patients,' they wrote. 'This statute is unconstitutional and will inflict irreparable harm on Planned Parenthood Members and their patients." Lawyers for the government argued in court documents that the bill 'stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion.' 'All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent,' the government wrote in its opposition to the motion. The government added that the plaintiffs 'now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. ... That request is legally groundless.' Hours after the lawsuit was filed, Talwani issued a temporary restraining order that prevented the government from enforcing the cuts. That order had been set to expire Monday. Solve the daily Crossword
2 days ago
- Health
Planned Parenthood wins partial victory in legal fight with Trump administration
BOSTON -- Planned Parenthood won a partial victory Monday in a legal fight with President Donald Trump's administration over efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation. A provision in that bill ends Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer things like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing. But U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston granted a preliminary injunction Monday that, for now, blocks the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations that either don't provide abortion care or didn't meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year. It wasn't immediately clear how many Planned Parenthood organizations and clinics would continue to get Medicaid reimbursements under that decision and how many might not. Planned Parenthood said in a statement after the injunction that it's thankful the court recognized 'the harm' caused by the bill. But it said it's disappointed that some of its members will lose this funding, 'risking chaos, confusion, and harm for patients who could now be turned away when seeking lifesaving reproductive health care.' 'The court has not yet ruled on whether it will grant preliminary injunctive relief to other members,' the statement added. "We remain hopeful that the court will grant this relief. There will be nothing short of a public health crisis if Planned Parenthood members are allowed to be 'defunded.'' The lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah. Planned Parenthood argued that allowing the provision to take effect would have devastating consequences nationwide, including increased rates of undiagnosed and untreated sexually transmitted diseases and cancer. 'With no reason other than plain animus, the law will prevent Planned Parenthood Members from providing vital — indeed, lifesaving — care to more than one million patients,' they wrote. 'This statute is unconstitutional and will inflict irreparable harm on Planned Parenthood Members and their patients." Lawyers for the government argued in court documents that the bill 'stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion.' 'All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent,' the government wrote in its opposition to the motion. The government added that the plaintiffs 'now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. ... That request is legally groundless.' Hours after the lawsuit was filed, Talwani issued a temporary restraining order that prevented the government from enforcing the cuts. That order had been set to expire Monday.
San Francisco Chronicle
2 days ago
- Health
- San Francisco Chronicle
Planned Parenthood wins partial victory in legal fight with Trump administration over funding cuts
BOSTON (AP) — Planned Parenthood won a partial victory Monday in a legal fight with President Donald Trump's administration over efforts to defund the organization in his signature tax legislation. A provision in that bill ends Medicaid payments for one year to abortion providers that received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023, even to those like Planned Parenthood that also offer things like contraception, pregnancy tests and STD testing. But U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston granted a preliminary injunction Monday that, for now, blocks the government from cutting Medicaid payments to Planned Parenthood member organizations that either don't provide abortion care or didn't meet a threshold of at least $800,000 in Medicaid reimbursements in a given year. It wasn't immediately clear how many Planned Parenthood organizations and clinics would continue to get Medicaid reimbursements under that decision and how many might not. Planned Parenthood said in a statement after the injunction that it's thankful the court recognized 'the harm' caused by the bill. But it said it's disappointed that some of its members will lose this funding, 'risking chaos, confusion, and harm for patients who could now be turned away when seeking lifesaving reproductive health care.' 'The court has not yet ruled on whether it will grant preliminary injunctive relief to other members,' the statement added. "We remain hopeful that the court will grant this relief. There will be nothing short of a public health crisis if Planned Parenthood members are allowed to be 'defunded.'' The lawsuit was filed earlier this month against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its member organizations in Massachusetts and Utah. Planned Parenthood argued that allowing the provision to take effect would have devastating consequences nationwide, including increased rates of undiagnosed and untreated sexually transmitted diseases and cancer. 'With no reason other than plain animus, the law will prevent Planned Parenthood Members from providing vital — indeed, lifesaving — care to more than one million patients,' they wrote. 'This statute is unconstitutional and will inflict irreparable harm on Planned Parenthood Members and their patients." Lawyers for the government argued in court documents that the bill 'stops federal subsidies for Big Abortion.' 'All three democratically elected components of the Federal Government collaborated to enact that provision consistent with their electoral mandates from the American people as to how they want their hard-earned taxpayer dollars spent,' the government wrote in its opposition to the motion. The government added that the plaintiffs 'now want this Court to reject that judgment and supplant duly enacted legislation with their own policy preferences. ... That request is legally groundless.'
