Latest news with #vsWade
Daily Mirror
9 hours ago
- Health
- Daily Mirror
'I'm an abortion nurse - I hold out hope UK won't follow US's draconian path'
At a time of progression and regression in the field of women's reproductive rights, abortion clinic nurse Kendall Robbins has shed light on what goes into her daily work, including the challenges and misconceptions she's come up against Last week, Adriana Smith, a brain-dead woman whose decomposing body was kept alive so her baby could be born, was finally taken off life support. The newborn, named Chance, weighed just 1 lb 13oz. It was a case that has shocked those already repulsed by the controversial reversal of Roe vs Wade in the US, a move that has already resulted in women dying after being denied life-saving care. Georgia's state laws prohibit abortion once a foetal heartbeat is detected, at approximately six weeks of gestation. Adriana had been eight weeks pregnant when she was declared brain dead, meaning her family was denied the dignity of saying goodbye on their own terms. But could we see such horror stories unfolding in the UK in the not-too-distant future? Advanced practice development nurse Kendall Robbins, who deals with the realities of terminations on a daily basis, thinks not. Originally from the US, Kendall now works at the MSI Choices Central London Abortion and Vasectomy Clinic, where staff predominantly perform medical abortions, as well as offering services relating to vasectomies and contraception. The 37-year-old previously worked in the field of international cultural relations. Her interest in healthcare inequalities, informed by her work overseas helping vulnerable women, ultimately prompted her to pursue a different career path. In an interview with the Mirror, Kendall welcomed the recent historic amendment that will decriminalise women who end their own pregnancies. In the past three years, six women have appeared before an English court, charged with ending or attempting to end their pregnancy illegally. Noting that those affected tend to be "very vulnerable for various reasons", Kendall said: "I thought it was a scary thing to see the rise in prosecutions that were happening where you had people being investigated for their stillbirths. That's a horrible thing. Imagine having a stillbirth and then having the police question you. "And we had instances of literally police appearing at people's bedside where they have potentially miscarried. I think removing that fear is really important because these are issues that need to be between a person and their health care provider." However, those in the field haven't always felt so positive. Before Safe Buffer Zones were introduced last autumn, workers and patients alike were left vulnerable to harassment from hostile protestors who would gather outside clinics. With the rise of anti-abortion sentiments in the US, this particular strain of zealous thought had crept over to British shores. This had frightening consequences for Kendall and her colleagues, who'd noticed a "rise" in more frequent protesters gathering outside the clinic in support of their 40 Days for Life campaign. Kendall recalled: "They were quite a negative presence. It would tend to be men or sometimes women, but you know, it's the same group of people. And they might be doing things like silent prayer, but they might also be singing. And handing out pamphlets with this information, and sometimes actively blocking people from the clinic or harassing staff, using name-calling, that sort of thing." This was particularly difficult when speaking with clients in street-facing rooms, where they might have to keep windows open. The protestors' singing would be audible as personal details were discussed, while the group may even be visible to the patient over the nurse's shoulder. There were occasions during fire drills or team meetings where staff members had to put up with protestors branding them "murderers" as they stepped outside. Kendall remembers one man in particular whom she "had a bit of a stare down with", who "loved to stand outside the door and make eye contact", Chillingly, there were also instances where staff who left the clinic early were followed down the road by these individuals - an eerie reminder of US counterparts who've faced violence and even assassination for providing abortion care. As explained by Kendall, this sort of "invasive" behaviour also took its toll on patients, some of whom had to deal with being photographed. This was particularly dangerous for more vulnerable women at risk of domestic abuse or honour-based violence, while infringing on privacy in a stigmatising way that arguably wouldn't happen with any other medical procedure. After the passing of the Safe Buffer Zone legislation, it is now illegal for anyone to do anything to intentionally or recklessly influence a person's decision to use abortion services, obstruct them, or cause harassment or distress to anyone using or working at such clinics. Applicable within a 150-metre radius of the service provider, those found guilty of breaking the law will face unlimited fines. Thankfully, Kendall hasn't witnessed this sort of harassment since the Safe Buffer Zones were introduced. Nowadays, the staff at MSI Choices can concentrate on providing "equitable, nonjudgmental, and supportive care", a service that can include everything from addressing safeguarding issues to offering contraception counselling. At the Central London branch, staff specialise in early medical abortions, whereby tablets are used instead of surgical abortions, which they wouldn't have the room for. Shedding some light on her day-to-day routine, Kendall, who is "passionate" about her work, shared: "My day-to-day would be normally running a list of people coming in to seek early medical abortions or having a pre-assessment for a surgical abortion. [...] "When a person makes contact with us, they can self-refer. So they can literally log in online, call us, chat features, all these different things. And the first step that they have when they make contact is to arrange what's called a consultation appointment, where we gather all of their medical history. So basically, someone is initially assessed in all that way, and that's usually done over the phone. Sometimes it's done face-to-face because someone needs an interpreter. And when we gather all that medical information, that's kind of the first step in guiding their care." At this point, the patient would be screened to check if they'd be eligible for telemedicine, meaning they can take pills at home without needing to attend a clinic. Kendall continued: "So we would screen their risk of ectopic pregnancy, and we would also screen to check that their last menstrual period was a reliable estimate for their gestation, and if there are any concerns about that. "So then they kind of get the choice. They can either have, if they're eligible for it, a telemedicine appointment, which would then be done over the phone. At any point in time, the nurse delivering that telemedical appointment can change their mind, or the doctors, and say they need a scan. "Or they can choose to come in to have a face-to-face appointment with me, another nurse, or they might need to come and have that scan." On a "typical day", Kendall would usually see around 12 patients. She shared: "In each appointment, we'd be reviewing their medical history, we would be doing an ultrasound scan, which would be to confirm the gestation. And it's really important to us that people always have the choice about that, whether they see the scan, know about the scan. And they also have the option to know nothing. "It's up to the person what that experience would be like for them. We also do really, really rigorous safeguarding, which is very, very important because pregnant women are at a significant risk for femicide, more than the general population, and are vulnerable to other types of abuse. So if we can identify any of those things, we can put support in place." A lesser-known part of Kendall's job involved making referrals to GPs, social services, charities and other healthcare providers, depending on the needs of the individual, as well as offering further testing. The final part of the appointment would see Kendall going through the medications with the patient in detail. She clarified: "They can take everything home if they want to or they can pick the first pill with me basically." According to Kendall, it's a common misconception that the majority of those who walk through the doors of the clinic are young girls. However, more than half are already mothers. Kendall told us: "It's a really big family planning decision, so sometimes you're having those conversations with people who are in these situations where they say 'This is something that's really detrimental to my other children for various reasons', or they're just not in the kind of life situation where they feel they can provide." All those who come through the clinic are offered a raft of support from counsellors and psychologists, as well as support from doctors if additional medical advice is needed. Naturally, and as with any line of healthcare work, providing abortion care comes with its own set of challenges. Kendall will talk with women from all sorts of complex situations, and this may well be the first time they've opened up about their issues to a healthcare provider. Kendall also faces preparing patients for the physical realities of the procedure itself, which, while safe, can also be "very painful". Of course, there are the usual challenges faced by so many nurses in 21st-century Britain, from pressures to time constraints. As Kendall noted, "You always want more time to spend with people to make sure that they have everything they need, that they're going home and feeling confident about what they're doing, and in terms of actually taking the medication to feel that they understand the whole system." But then you factor in that this is a procedure many will have not had much time to plan for, with life often "getting in the way" at every turn. Kendall explained: "This isn't the kind of appointment that someone has booked in for weeks and weeks and weeks. Life gets in the way. And so we do get people who arrive late because of train travel if they've come from afar, or child care issues, that's a big one that we get. We just try to make sure that we can see everybody as soon as they want to be seen." Like many women, Kendall knows through her own personal experiences just how important this line of healthcare is, but all too often, abortion care remains a taboo subject. She believes this lingering stigmatisation can be tackled by people, including high-profile figures and celebrities, sharing their personal stories. Although the nature of her work may seem heavy, Kendall has found many moments of positivity in her career so far. She revealed: "One of my favourite pieces of feedback I ever had was when I first started out and the patient left a note to say, 'I really appreciated that the nurse somehow made me laugh in what was like a really difficult situation for myself'. She just talked about how she went away and felt really satisfied with the experience. She felt supported, didn't feel alone in that situation, and she felt confident about what had happened." Kendall also derives satisfaction from times when, during challenging safeguarding situations, when she's implemented much-needed support for an individual, "and maybe helped them to get out of, or to take a step to get out". She reflected: "There have been some horrible stories in the news recently about some really upsetting cases of femicide. I think knowing that maybe you play your role in preventing something like that by escalating those referrals." Under the Global Gag Rule, organisations such as MSI are prohibited from receiving US government funding as they provide abortion services, slashing access to services such as family planning and maternity centres in a campaign Kendall fears will "result in deaths of millions of people" However, ultimately, Kendall holds out hope that the world is "continuing to move in the right direction" on this front. Polls show that British people overwhelmingly are not represented by those who walk in the March for Life protests - an annual US-funded anti-choice event, set to take place again this September. Furthermore, as noted by Kendall, there have been signs of progress elsewhere in the world, with more than 60 countries and territories having liberalised their abortion legislation over the past 30 years. Out of these, as per the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), just four, including the US, have regressed. As an American who regularly hears concerning stories about abortion legislation from back home, Kendall is "proud to be a part of ensuring" women's access to essential healthcare. She said: "It's nice to work in a clinic that's dedicated to doing this because it just means that like everyone that's working here has got like-minded, that you know that hopefully people coming in feel that and feel like it's a non-judgmental space and that they're here with a nurse who wants to support them."
NZ Herald
18-05-2025
- Health
- NZ Herald
Family says brain-dead pregnant US woman kept alive due to abortion ban
The next morning, when she was taken to the hospital where she worked, doctors found multiple blood clots in her brain, and she was declared brain dead. Georgia law bans all abortion treatments after six weeks of pregnancy — one of the so-called 'heartbeat' laws, referring to the approximate first detection of a fetal heartbeat. As Smith was nine weeks along, doctors were hesitant to do anything that could contravene the law, according to Newkirk. Smith has been kept on life support ever since, and is now 21 weeks into her pregnancy. 'I'm not saying that we would have chosen to terminate her pregnancy, what I'm saying is: we should have had a choice,' Newkirk said. Smith, who has a son, has been kept on a ventilator to bring the fetus to term, though Newkirk said doctors are not sure the pregnancy will be viable or without health complications. 'Chilling effect' Katie Watson, a professor at Northwestern University specialising in medical ethics and reproductive rights, said the abortion law does not apply to a case like Smith's. The 'Georgia abortion statute is completely unrelated to removing a ventilator from a brain-dead person. It has nothing to say about that, even if that person is pregnant at the time of their death,' Watson told AFP on Friday (local time). 'If the family's report of what the hospital told them is accurate, the hospital has made a surprising misinterpretation of Georgia's abortion law,' she added. Watson said it was possible the hospital's actions were out of fear of legal liability, 'which is a chilling effect of these statutes' against abortion. Emory Healthcare, the hospital system where Smith is being treated, did not immediately respond to a request for comment by AFP. The saga provoked a strong reaction by Democrats and abortion rights organisations. 'Everyone deserves the freedom to decide what's best for their families, futures, and lives,' Democratic congresswoman Nikema Williams of Georgia said in a statement. Williams accused US President Donald Trump and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, both Republicans, of 'forcing people through unimaginable pain'. 'It is deadly to be black and pregnant in a state where reproductive care is limited and criminalised,' said Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong, an advocacy group focusing on reproductive justice for women of colour. Since the US Supreme Court's decision to end federal protection of abortion rights in 2022, states like Georgia have adopted tough anti-abortion laws. Trump, who in his first term appointed three conservative justices to the Supreme Court, has frequently credited himself on contributing to the overturning of Roe vs Wade, which had secured the right to terminate a pregnancy.
Time of India
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Who was David Souter? Former US Supreme Court Justice dead at 85
Former US Supreme Court Justice David Souter has died "peacefully" at his home in New Hampshire at the age of 85. In 1990, Justice Souter came into the spotlight after President George HW Bush appointed him to the court. He eventually stepped down in 2009 after completing more than 19 years in the service. #Operation Sindoor India-Pakistan Clash Live Updates| Missiles, shelling, and attacks — here's all that's happening Pakistani Air Force jet shot down in Pathankot by Indian Air Defence: Sources India on high alert: What's shut, who's on leave, and state-wise emergency measures The retired Associate Justice breathed his last on Thursday (May 8), according to a statement by the US Supreme Court, issued on Friday morning. However, the cause of death was not mentioned in the official release. Who was Justice David H. Souter? Born on September 17, 1939, he belonged to the Melrose town in Massachusetts. Souter was a Harvard Law School graduate, besides studying at the prestigious Oxford University as well. The Rhodes scholar completed his graduation in 1966 and then shifted back to New Hampshire's Concord. Thereafter, he did his law practice at the Orr and Reno firm until 1968. Continue to video 5 5 Next Stay Playback speed 1x Normal Back 0.25x 0.5x 1x Normal 1.5x 2x 5 5 / Skip Ads by by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Modern and Economic Container Houses in the Philippines: 2025 Prices and Models LocalPlan Learn More Undo He was named the region's Deputy Attorney General in 1971. Few years later, he was appointed as New Hampshire's Attorney General, in 1976. With time, Souter's rank continued to rise. Some of the other positions he held were Associate Justice of the Superior Court as well as the Associate Justice of the state's Supreme Court (1983). David Souter appointed to Supreme Court by the then-President In 1990, then US President George H.W. Bush chose Justice Souter when William Brennan announced his retirement from the top judicial body, according to Reuters. Live Events Back then, not much was known about his personal views on several key issues, especially abortion rights. While "the litmus test approach" was not applied, Bush had praised him as a "remarkable judge of keen intellect". Dubbed a "stealth nominee" at his Senate confirmation hearings, Souter later became a favourite for the American liberals. He is said to have left several conservatives disappointed when he backed the abortion rights in a major ruling in 1992. The right to abortion got reaffirmed through the decision under the 1973 Roe vs Wade. The conservatives were unhappy as they hoped the panel would overturn the earlier order. But, they instead ended up setting new standard barring regulations. This imposed "undue burden" on the ability of a woman to obtain the procedure, according to Reuters. During his time in the court, he also joined the liberal justices in dissent over the high-profile Bush vs Gore matter. The 5-4 verdict ended the dispute over recount of Florida ballots. Post this, Republican George W. Bush was announced the winner for US presidential polls in 2000. Souter never got married during his entire life. He announced his retirement at the age of 69. His exit was during the US Supreme Court's 2008-2009 term. This led to a vacancy at the court during President Barack Obama's early days in the White House. FAQs: 1. Who was appointed after David Souter's retirement from the US Supreme Court? President Barack Obama had nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the seat. 2. When did David Souter get appointed to the US Supreme Court? He was named as the Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in May 1990.
The Courier
25-04-2025
- Politics
- The Courier
As with gay marriage progress will win in trans debate
And so it rolls on. The Supreme Court's decision on biological sex and the Equalities Act has split the nation in two. Anyone who scratched beneath the surface knew the Supreme Court was never likely to rule any other way. Unlike the USA's Supreme Court, which can be packed with cronies until it overturns laws like Roe vs Wade, the UK's Supreme Court is a non-political body that interprets existing legislation. Because the Equality Act is 15 years old it predates the current trans debate and doesn't make much provision for it. While 'gender reassignment' is a protected characteristic, the ongoing argument over definitions of a man and woman are a much more recent phenomenon. This toxic debate has already divided people into camps as entrenched as you'll find in any Old Firm fans group. A Fife doctor and nurse who should be in the spotlight for the life-enhancing work they perform are instead locked in a bitter tribunal battle over whether they can use the same changing room. This week Dundee University's new rector and JK Rowling got into a set-to about the issue. In the short term life is likely to get more difficult for trans people as spaces formerly available to them are closed off. But what I suspect will happen is over the next five or 10 years fresh legislation will be passed giving trans people more rights than they currently enjoy. Perhaps not as many as they want, and changes will be met with howls of protest from the groups who oppose them, but it feels inevitable. Because progress always wins. Every generation breaks down a new social barrier. Only when you look back do you get a sense of perspective on how far we've come and an inkling of where we might go next. It's just over a decade since same-sex marriage became legal in Scotland. In the years leading up to it there was similar vehement and divisive debate around that issue. The right wing press pilloried it as an attack on marriage and traditional values. It felt like everyone got sucked into the debate. I recall numerous dinner table disputes with older relatives who insisted allowing gay people to tie the knot would undermine the institution of marriage. A few years later, after the dust had settled, I asked them in what ways they felt their own marriage was weaker now. Of course they had no answer. In fact they had largely forgotten how vociferously they once stood against equal marriage. Only gay people – delighted to be allowed to be as miserable as the rest of us – were affected by the change in the law. Go back another generation or two, to the 1950s and '60s, and interracial marriage was the trigger issue. While it was never illegal in Britain like it was in America it was widely reviled. Newspapers portrayed mixed neighbourhoods as hotbeds of crime, prostitution and gambling. And Government guidance advised white British women not to marry Chinese, Hindu, Muslim, or black men. I suspect there'll be a handful of people reading this column that are still salty about equal marriage but I doubt there's anyone still around who cares if a white woman marries a black man, or vice versa. Times move on and the same thing will happen here. The media has a notoriously short attention span. Trans issues won't stay in the spotlight forever. Eventually a combination of new legal protections and evolving social attitudes will mean we no longer care as much which toilets or changing facilities people use. Disabled people have used the same toilets for decades. And the bathroom in my own house has been gender neutral for as long as I can remember. Really the only issue that needs attention is sports, where there has to be some kind of give-and-take in setting the rules. I don't really care if someone who was born a man sets the women's Park Run record. But you couldn't have a trans Anthony Joshua fighting for the women's world championship. They'd kill someone. Speaking of boxing, do you remember the Algerian fighter Imane Khelif, who fought at the Paris Olympics last year? She was born biologically female and has always been a woman. But she looked a bit manly and that was enough to trigger an avalanche of hatred and bile. Suddenly all those people who badgered the Prime Minister to say whether a woman could have a penis or a man could have a uterus changed their tune completely. Now sex was nothing to do with your genitalia, it was all about whether someone has XY chromosomes or more than the usual level of testosterone. When I was a kid Fatima Whitbread and Tessa Sanderson were national heroes the country cheered for. If they were competing today I wonder if they would have to contend with social media savages telling them they're not feminine enough to compete. Heck, Serena Williams probably only just got her career established in time to avoid being vilified. I find the whole thing tiresome and dispiriting. People used to say giving gay people rights would remove rights from straight people. Now they're saying giving trans people rights will remove rights from women. The level of hatred aimed at trans people could more usefully be pointed at Vladimir Putin. Or Donald Trump. Or the people who profited from nepotistic PPE contracts. Or a million other more worthy subjects. Better still, why don't we forget about the hatred and put our energy into more positive endeavours. I hate the word 'woke' – it's just a synonym for political correctness, which itself is just a term for trying to be kinder and less offensive to one another. The whole thing makes me wonder what I'll be angry and backwards about when I'm an old man. Eventually society moves on and if we don't keep up we find ourselves left behind. I have a five-month old daughter. When she's a grown woman, what kind of outdated 2020s morality will I be throwing at her? 'You can identify as any sex you like and date people of any gender or ethnicity as long as they love you back and treat you right. But no child of mine is marrying a robot.'
