Description
For this week’s discussion, I chose proposed bill: H.Res.561Links to an external site. — 118th Congress (2023-2024)”Expressing opposition to the use of State power against people in the United States seeking essential health care, including criminalization of the full range of sexual and reproductive health care such as abortion, gender-affirming care, and contraceptive care, and disapproving of State punishment of people for their pregnancy outcomes”.Since Roe vs. Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2022, many states began restricting access to care for numerous marginalized groups, including: women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community. According to Abortion Laws (2023), 14 states have completely outlawed abortions and another 13 states or territories have greatly restricted access with the hopes to fully ban. In 1976, when the Hyde Amendment was federally passed, this ensured no federal funding would go to abortion rights. Although the amendment was passed almost 50 years ago, “congress has renewed the Hyde Amendment every year since” (Abortion Laws, 2023). With restricted funding, this meant most abortion access was state funded; however, states were complying because Roe vs. Wade protected those rights. Now that abortion clinics no longer have protection under Roe vs. Wade, its critical we demand equal access from our state legislators. Which social determinant most affects this policy?This house resolution is addressing the issue of access to equitable and safe healthcare. With numerous states fully banning abortion access and targeting any physician that challenges this decision, access is sought in neighboring states; however in areas such as Louisiana and Gaum, this makes it even more difficult (Abortion Law, 2023). All of Louisiana’s neighboring states, also banned abortion meaning residents seeking such services need to drive several hours and sometimes across several states. Guam poses even more challenges since it is an island with the nearest abortion friendly state being Florida. Access from Guam to Florida would require boat or plane, meaning we now get into another problematic social determinate for those with limited or no income. Explain whether you believe there is an evidence base to support the proposed policy and explain why. Be specific and provide examples.There is significant research, some of which is pointed out in the full text of this bill, that addresses each area of opposition. One common theme for each area addressed in H.Res.561, is that eliminating, restricting or punishing people increases the use of unsafe treatments, greatly harms not only the mental health, but overall health if individuals impacted and sets several marginalized groups back in regards to healthcare equity. “Researchers have found that a total abortion ban could increase the number of maternal deaths by 24 percent, with the greatest impact on Black women, at 39 percent” (Salas-Betsch et al., 2022). States that have already banned abortion practices are not stopping there, they are continuing to advocate and pressure neighboring states to also ban services (Abortion Law, 2023). According to ANA (n.d.), “advocacy is a pillar of nursing” and “legislative and political advocacy is no less important to advancing the profession and patient care”. I strongly believe that physicians and nurses’ testimony is critical for legislators to hear. As the research supports, restricting access does not mean people will stop seeking services; it means more deaths will occur. Additionally, overturning Roe vs. Wade and restricting access has caused great mental health harm to those impacted; this is data I would like to see better tracked and eventually used to support future bills or resolutions.
