Abortion – Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information

Anti-abortion rights demonstrators and Abortion rights demonstrators rally outside the Supreme Court, in Washington, Wednesday, March 4, 2020, as the court takes up the first major abortion case of the Trump era Wednesday, an election-year look at a Louisiana dispute that could reveal how willing the more conservative court is to roll back abortion rights. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Saying Louisiana politicians are trying to exploit the coronavirus pandemic to further their goals, a national reproductive rights group Tuesday asked federal court in Baton Rouge to immediately block the state’s efforts to close the state’s three abortion clinics.

“This is a shameful abuse of power,” said Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, based in New York City. “Louisiana has been trying for decades to end abortion.”

The Center represents the Hope Medical Group in Shreveport in this action as well as in another case involving nearby hospital admitting privileges for physicians who perform the pregnancy ending procedures. Depending on how the U.S. Supreme Court rules in the admitting privileges case, abortion clinics in Louisiana and other states could close.

Northup told reporters in a telephonic press conference that Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and his anti-abortion allies apparently couldn’t wait for the Supreme Court decision, which was due in late May/early June before the pandemic, and targeted an abortion clinics through an interpretation of a March directive by the Louisiana Department of Health. She said Louisiana, and other states with strong anti-abortion restrictions, have long interpreted medical policies as reasons for limiting the procedure.

The health department directive limits nonemergency medical procedures during the COVID-19 crisis. But Section A of the health department order excludes patients with an emergency or whose health would be undermined by waiting.

The Center argues that delays for abortions, which have limitations based on the age of the fetus, force patients into traveling hundreds of miles to states where the legal medical procedure is more readily available or force women to give birth against their wills.

Landry issued a statement Tuesday, noting that he hasn’t been served with the lawsuit yet. He added the abortion clinics are asserting that “the rules that apply to other facilities do not apply to them.

“While the rest of Louisiana has come together to fight COVID-19, it is disappointing that (Hope Medical) is once again claiming that they are exceptional and entitled to a blanket exemption.”

Landry last week launched an investigation into whether the state’s three abortion clinics were abiding by the health department directive.

Two assistant attorney generals burst in on the Hope Clinic – they visited clinics in Baton Rouge and New Orleans as well – demanding a review of the protocols put in place and equipment being used to check compliance with the directive limiting medical procedures during crisis, said Kathleen Pittman, Hope’s administrator. They also demanded to review the personal records of individuals who have received abortions since the beginning of the pandemic.

The visits came as something of shock, Pittman said. Usually, it’s health department personnel who perform inspections, not the state’s chief law enforcement agency.

Pittman said she needed to involve lawyers to keep the Attorney General’s Office from taking the charts of patients back to Baton Rouge. The clinic is practicing social distancing by allowing only the patient into the facility as well as doing all counseling on one day and all the procedures on the next. Twenty-four hours must pass between counseling and the actual abortion under state law. She also said that the clinic doesn’t use the medicines and equipment most needed by hospitals battling COVID-19.

At least seven states have issued medical procedures orders that have been interpreted as including abortion clinics. Legal challenges to similar closure orders are pending the states that include Arkansas, Alabama, Oklahoma and Ohio. So far, enforcement of the restrictions have been temporarily blocked. Iowa settled its case.

Republican state attorneys general, whose association Landry leads, have appealed those decisions. So far, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is the only appellate court to consider a trial court’s restraining order barring use of emergency COVID-19 orders as a pretext for closing the abortion clinics.

The 5th Circuit on April 7 upheld Texas Gov. Greg Abbott’s March 22 directive, thereby allowing state officials to shutter the clinics. That order has since been modified to allow abortions for women whose pregnancies have gone long enough that the procedure would no longer be allowed under existing state laws and, on Monday, to allow women to end pregnancies using medication in some cases.

Louisiana used similar language as Abbott in its order.

Landry’s teams started visiting Louisiana’s abortion clinics the day after the 5th Circuit’s decision.

On March 30, U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel, of Austin, temporarily restrained Texas officials from enforcing Abbott’s order as it applied to abortion clinics. The state went to the 5th Circuit, which lifted the temporary restraining order, thereby closing abortion clinics while the courts figured what to do next.

In a 2-1 decision written by 5th Circuit Judge Kyle Duncan, of Baton Rouge, the majority used unusually sharp language in criticizing Yeakel for ignoring federal caselaw that oversees public health emergencies. The majority contended that the COVID-19 pandemic has created such “mounting strains on health-care systems,” that Texas is within its rights to ban non-emergency medical procedures, including abortions.

Fifth Circuit Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod, of Houston, joined in Duncan’s decision.

Judge James L. Dennis, of New Orleans, disagreed, pointing out that abortions are legal medical procedures that are time sensitive. He noted that the federal caselaw on which the majority relied comes from a 1905 decision that gave the state authority to force vaccinations on Massachusetts residents during a smallpox epidemic and therefore was not really on point.

Source: https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/coronavirus/article_80b4612e-7e80-11ea-a33c-bb099e9072de.html?fbclid=IwAR1gJfBvaqIqfu6ie0wNXTXHoXbHI0iSbptZrIZa4Q637H0cPWKXReGzzFA

From securing financial assistance for abortion care to self-managing abortion to using telemedicine, here are ways people can obtain care amid the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Navigating abortion restrictions during the COVID-19 crisis has been a major challenge for many across the country.
Shutterstock

Four years ago, I needed an abortion in Texas while HB2, Republicans’ sweeping anti-abortion law, was still in effect. I wondered if I’d have to continue a pregnancy for which I wasn’t ready.

It took me two weeks to access care that I needed immediately. I’m struggling today knowing that as a result of the COVID-pandemic, countless others are facing similar barriers I had faced. Millions have lost their job and are without childcare, and some anti-choice government officials have used the crisis to outright ban abortion—directly violating our rights under Roe v. Wade.

We’ve known that our right to an abortion means nothing if we can’t access it. Even though it feels hard right now, you should know advocates have worked for decades to ensure people always have access to abortion care, especially in times like these.

If you’re seeking abortion care during the pandemic, I want to help you learn about the same network that helped me access an abortion when it felt impossible. Here are some tips that might help you navigate the state of abortion access during COVID-19.

How to get an abortion in a state that has deemed abortion “nonessential” 

If you’re seeking an abortion in a state that’s attempting to or have already restricted access during the pandemic, you’ve probably experienced a delay in your appointment at least once. But if you have the capacity, you should call clinics—including those in surrounding areas—frequently for updates because circumstances can change day to day.

Some clinics may be scheduling appointments for the future, and if legal action changes abortion access, scheduling an appointment allows the clinic to contact you to tell you about appointment availability. Providers are working closely with advocates to ensure access to abortion care continues, and they’re one of the first to know when services can resume.

Clinics can also connect people with resources for out-of-state abortion care. Providers are already prepared with this information for people over the legal limit to have an abortion in certain states, and who are forced to travel to one of the states that provide later abortions.

If you’re considering traveling, you’re not alone. Fund Texas Choice, a practical support organization providing Texans with travel assistance, told Rewire.News last month that pregnant people with varying gestational ages have reached out for assistance to go out of state since Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) banned abortion under COVID-19. The Brigid Alliance, a practical support organization that helps people traveling to clinics providing second- and third-trimester abortions, told Rewire.News that the organization has recently helped people with pregnancies of earlier gestations, as well as families who are forced to travel together as a result of a lack of childcare.

Because of shelter-in-place orders, some state officials are preventing drivers from crossing state lines and subjecting non-residents to 14-day quarantines, which could increase the logistical costs pregnant people face. Some methods of transportation have been affected too. But the Brigid Alliance says it hasn’t encountered drivers being turned away when crossing state lines, and the organization is letting folks flying to New Mexico know that in order to be exempt from the state quarantine, they can only travel between the clinic and hotel where they’re staying.

Brigid Alliance is also seeing the impacts that are surging for those providing and needing practical support.

“Bus lines have closed down, airlines have spontaneously canceled flights, hotels have closed down entirely or reduced capacity—we had to move people from hotel to hotel in the middle of a three- to four-day process [to get an abortion], and we’re hearing from partners that there are some Greyhound lines that are doing temperature checks,” Odile Schalit, executive director of the Brigid Alliance, said.

Schalit wants people to know support is available for those seeking care amid the ever-changing landscape of abortion access.

“While the obstacles to your health care may appear numerous today, please know that there is a network of good people, volunteers, and resources that exist to support you. Tap into our network and, as much as possible, your own,” Schalit said. “Take your time, break down your plan and needs, and take stock of your unique physical and emotional safety and comfort. For many, accessing abortion care now means having to travel out of your home town, city, and state. While this may seem impossible, we and many others are here to help you construct safe plans for getting to your care.”

If you’re thinking about traveling out of state for abortion access, consider going to one of the 23 states that don’t have a mandatory waiting period to limit the number of times you have to visit a clinic before the procedure.

How to get an abortion if you need help paying for an abortion, traveling to a clinic, or other logistical support 

Abortion funds and practical support organizations help alleviate the high costs associated with paying for an abortion and traveling in or out of state. Funds generally help with the cost of an abortion, while practical support organizations cover travel-related costs; some do both. Below are some organizations that may be able to help you access the care you need:

• Northwest Abortion Access Fund provides financial and logistical assistance to people seeking abortions (and those needing to travel out of state for a later abortion) in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
• Yellowhammer Fund provides financial assistance to people seeking an abortion in Alabama, including those needing to travel out of state. The organization recently increased its budget and implemented a Visa gift card program to help alleviate some of the additional burdens people may face.
• New Orleans Abortion Fund provides financial assistance to people who live in or are traveling to southern Louisiana for abortion care. People who need to travel outside of Louisiana for care can call the organization for more information.
• ARC-Southeast provides financial assistance and travel support to people seeking abortions in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee—including people needing to travel out of state.
• The Brigid Alliance provides logistical support through referrals from clinics and funds by providing plane, bus, and train tickets, hotel stays, rideshares, meal stipends, parking, gas, and toll costs, as well as “reimbursement for childcare and travel-related expenses, like flat tires or oil changes,” Schalit said.
• The Lilith Fund for Reproductive Equity provides financial assistance to central and southern Texans seeking abortion care, including those needing to travel out of state. According to the organization, its hotline will remain open on an extended schedule from Monday to Friday, 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. Central time. “At Lilith Fund, we will continue to fight for our callers and ensure that folks have access to care during this pandemic,” Shae Ward, hotline coordinator for the Lilith Fund, told Rewire.News. “Every day on our hotline we hear how these [abortion] bans are hurting people. In the past two weeks, our clients have had to travel an average of 700-plus miles to get to a clinic in a neighboring state; one recently traveled as far as 1,600 miles—even though she lived only three miles away from her local clinic that was forced to stop providing care due to the ban. Our clients are forced to make appointments with clinics in surrounding states and are facing long wait times. This pushes them further into their pregnancy, which makes their procedures more expensive. The restrictions on clinic services are cruel and put people’s lives in danger.”
• Texas Equal Access (TEA) Fund provides financial assistance for abortion costs to people in north Texas, including those needing to travel out of state.
• Fund Texas Choice provides travel support, like plane tickets, hotel stays, and gas costs, for Texans needing to travel to abortion clinics. People can call the organization for more information, or fill out an online application every Thursday starting at 8 a.m. local time.

To find other local abortion funds and practical support organizations in your area, visit the National Network of Abortion Funds to search for groups by state.

You can also ask abortion clinics to screen you for financial assistance. Unlike assistance from abortion funds and practical support organizations, in-clinic funding can be income-based, but you aren’t required to show proof of how much money you earn.

How to get an abortion in a state that allows telemedicine 

Eighteen states prohibit the use of telemedicine for abortion care. If you live in one of the states that allow it, medical abortions can be obtained up to ten weeks into pregnancy through video conference with an abortion provider.

While U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restrictions prevent the medication from being mailed to your home, patients can avoid traveling long distances to an abortion clinic while protecting their health during the pandemic by visiting a nearby health center to receive the medication under guidance of a doctor.

TelAbortion, however, can send the medication to your home if you’re eligible. TelAbortion is a study run by reproductive and maternal health research group Gynuity, and the evaluation is offered over the internet—so you can access it on your own phone or computer. But the FDA requires people participating in the study to visit a health clinic in order to have an ultrasound or pelvic exam, according to Dr. Elizabeth Raymond, senior medical associate for Gynuity Health Projects.

You will need video conference access in one of the 13 states participating in the study, and have a mailing address in the state where the medication can be sent.

If a person encounters barriers in accessing an ultrasound or pelvic exam—especially barriers compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic—they can call a TelAbortion site, as the provider may be able to accommodate their situation.

If you’re eligible for a TelAbortion, you’ll be sent “a package containing the necessary medications and an instruction sheet by mail.” Afterward, the TelAbortion provider follows up with study participants to ensure the abortion was successful, “and to address any side effects and complications.” According to their data, the TelAbortion model is just as effective as an in-person abortion.

In the past two months, Gynuity expanded its TelAbortion study to include Maryland and Illinois, and the hope is to continue to expand during the pandemic, as telemedicine abortion care will be critical. In the past few weeks, Gynuity has had a significant increase in traffic to the TelAbortion site.

“We’ve been doing this study since 2016, [and] now it’s right there [and] ready,” Raymond said. “It’s gratifying to be able to help in this crisis.”

What you need to know about self-managed abortion 

Self-managed has proven to be extremely safe—a 0.3 percent risk of major complications, according to an analysis by Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health. Interest in it is also rising.

Self-managed abortion can include using mifepristone and misoprostol, or misoprostol alone, to end a pregnancy. Mifepristone blocks the hormone essential to advancing pregnancy, whereas misoprostol empties the uterus.

Plan C provides a “report card” on online retailers that offer the medications, resources about how the process works, and the legal risks surrounding it. Some states have laws that could be used against people ending their own pregnancies—at least 21 people have been arrested since 2005, Jill E. Adams, executive director of If/When/How: Lawyering for Reproductive Justice, told Rewire.News.

In states without such laws, Adams said some have faced charges as a result of prosecutors “misapplying parts of the criminal codes that were never intended for people ending their own pregnancies.” In most cases, the judge determines the law doesn’t apply, but at that point, people have already been arrested, lost their job, and face public scrutiny as a result of private records being released.

“The risk is highest for populations and communities under surveillance and on the receiving end of disproportionate state violence—communities of color, especially Black and African American people, immigrants, and trans and gender nonconforming people, are all more at risk of criminalization, and [they’re] also more likely to need self-managed abortion due to barriers to clinic-based care and bans on coverage,” Adams said.

Mandatory reporters, like health-care professionals, can also feel obligated to report people should they seek follow-up care from a doctor, even though Adams said the American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the American Medical Association recommends against it.

“No state requires mandatory reporting for suspected or confirmed self-managed abortion, including when the person is a minor,” Adams said. “If people do report, they are likely violating patient privacy laws.”

When seeking follow-up care, people aren’t legally required to disclose their situation to a doctor. If/When/How: Lawyering for Reproductive Justice’s legal helpline offers information on a person’s rights when talking to law enforcement officials or doctors involving self-managed abortion. According to the website, no one has been arrested for buying abortion pills online.

“The right to abortion—self-managed or provider-directed—still exists throughout the United States,” Adams said. “But laws have been misused and power abused in unjustly criminalizing people for ending their own pregnancies.”

The helpline offers free, confidential legal information to people concerned with being “investigated or arrested” for self-managing an abortion, as well as legal advice from an attorney when necessary.

But Adams said if there were ever a time to “eliminate the sources of criminalization,” that time is now. Their legal helpline has received double the number of inquiries they usually get. “Local, state, and federal officials should make it clear that no one will be arrested, charged, or detained for ending their pregnancy, or for helping someone else end their pregnancy—and not just during the pandemic, but always,” Adams said.

If you need an abortion without parental consent 

In the 37 states that have forced parental involvement laws for young people seeking abortion care, teenagers are forced to go through the overwhelming process of obtaining a judicial bypass, or permission from a judge to have an abortion. As a result of the pandemic, shelter-in-place orders and school closures prevent teens from discreetly leaving home to go to court, or even obtaining resources that may be able to support them.

• If you’re under 18, live in Texas, and want an abortion without telling your parents, contact the Jane’s Due Process hotline 24/7 at 866-999-5263 to be matched with a free attorney. You’ll also receive direct support from Irma Garcia, Jane’s client services manager, and the abortion costs will be covered by the National Abortion Federation. Those living outside of Texas can text the hotline from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. Central time to learn about the process in their own state.
• Teens in North Carolina and South Carolina can reach the Carolina Abortion Fund for help getting a judicial bypass by texting “ABBY” at 844-997-2229 from 9 a.m. to noon Eastern time every day.
• Teens in Illinois can contact the Illinois Judicial Bypass Coordination Project, a project of the ACLU of Illinois, by calling 877-442-9727 or texting 312-560-6607 weekdays from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. Central time and from noon to 5 p.m. on weekends.
• Those living in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, or Tennessee can contact ARC-Southeast for assistance with the process. Some Planned Parenthoods and independent abortion clinics might be able to help you learn about the process, including which courthouse you need to go to.

Other things to know when seeking abortion care during COVID-19 

Be aware that crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), or anti-choice clinics, are still operating, but they don’t provide abortion care. Even if they offer to talk to you about your options, they won’t refer you to an abortion clinic or provide the necessary resources to obtain one. Reach out to any of the aforementioned organizations for information about the next steps.

The Online Abortion Resource Squad, a group of volunteers who respond to abortion-related questions on Reddit with compassionate, accurate answers, developed a resource site in response to the confusion and uncertainty around abortion during this health crisis. The site offers up-to-date information on clinic operations in states that have deemed abortion as nonessential health care, as well as connecting with local resources for financial and logistical assistance, and locating clinics in your state and nearby states.

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2020/04/13/how-to-get-an-abortion-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/

Each year, nearly 1 million women choose to end a pregnancy in the United States, and about one quarter of American women will use abortion services by 45 years of age. Women’s ability to determine whether and when they have a child has profound consequences for their self-determination and for the economic, social, and political equality of women as a group. Because access to safe abortion care is time-sensitive and vitally important, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and other reproductive health professional organizations issued an unequivocal statement on March 18, 2020, that they “do not support Covid-19 responses that cancel or delay abortion procedures.”

Despite ACOG’s position, governors in a number of states have called for a halt to abortion care throughout the Covid-19 epidemic. Governors in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Oklahoma have ordered or supported the cessation of both medication and surgical abortion, while governors in other states have directed that surgical abortion alone must stop. (“Medication abortion” uses pills to end pregnancy in the first trimester; “surgical abortion” includes a variety of procedures at various stages of pregnancy.) Politicians in additional states have announced their intentions to issue similar orders.

These governors, who have worked to restrict access to abortion in the past, have categorized abortion procedures as “elective” or “nonessential.” Lawsuits challenging the orders are pending. As of April 8, 2020, temporary restraining orders (TROs) have blocked state bans while litigation proceeds in Ohio, Alabama, and Oklahoma. In Texas, a TRO granted by a district court was reversed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, thereby halting abortions once more. The orders have had immediate effects on patients; thousands of women have already been turned away from abortion care. Given the potential effects on thousands more women if states suspend abortion care throughout the Covid-19 outbreak, the president of the American Medical Association (AMA) issued a statement on March 30, 2020, in support of continued access to abortion and explaining that physicians, not politicians, should decide which procedures can be delayed.

The new restrictive state policies highlight the vulnerability of abortion care in the United States. Abortion is an essential health service. The Covid-19 outbreak has illuminated several weaknesses in our health care system, and one lesson should be that our system of abortion care delivery must be strengthened in ways that prevent abortion access from being so easily rescinded in times of health system stress, whether minor or substantial.

Politicians and others advocating for the closure of abortion clinics claim that their goal is to increase the availability of personal protective equipment (PPE) for medical staff treating Covid-19. But this argument doesn’t make sense. Women who are unable to obtain an abortion will either remain pregnant and require prenatal care and support during delivery or may use dangerous methods to induce an abortion on their own, as was more common historically when abortion care was unavailable. Both these scenarios could lead to much more contact with clinicians and greater need for PPE, thereby increasing risks to both patients and staff.

Rather than being about preservation of PPE, the abortion restrictions imposed in recent weeks are the latest round in a long-running debate about whether abortion is a legitimate health care service. “Elective” abortion has been physically separated from other routine health care services; it is predominantly performed in independent clinics, even though it could be performed in most private obstetrics and gynecology practices. The national discourse has also portrayed abortion providers as “outside” health care, misrepresenting them as a distinct set of physicians with suspect professional motivations who must be regulated with special laws. The idea of “abortion exceptionalism” is propagated in part by people motivated by a desire to make abortion illegal or inaccessible, and policymakers of this mindset have enacted hundreds of new abortion restrictions over the past 10 years.

But the procedure has also been marginalized by health care professionals who support abortion care in the abstract yet seek to avoid controversy by distancing themselves from “elective” abortion. The commonness of abortion in the United States suggests that most physicians personally know someone who has chosen to end a pregnancy, and most also care every day for people who have relied on safe, legal, and accessible abortion services. However, a desire not to be associated with the politics surrounding abortion has led to a lack of solidarity in the medical profession that leaves the physicians who are providing pregnancy-termination services in the midst of a pandemic more vulnerable than ever.

The historical misclassification of most abortions as “elective” is also central to the vulnerability of abortion care. There is no debate that a minority of abortions are necessary to prevent death or serious physical harm. But this strictly medical model fails to capture the reality that the nonmedical reasons that women exercise their constitutional right to abortion are often as important to them and their families as averting a serious health consequence. The long-standing insistence on using the word “elective” to describe the vast majority of abortions frames women’s equality as a luxury and women’s autonomy as expendable. Categorizing abortions as “elective” or “therapeutic” is more of a moral judgment than a medical judgment,³ and it allows people who use these terms to determine a woman’s level of deservingness on the basis of her reason for choosing to pursue abortion.⁴ In the rest of medicine, classifying a surgical procedure as “elective” doesn’t determine whether or where it will be done. Instead, it denotes that a case can be planned and scheduled, as opposed to an “urgent” case that cannot be delayed without causing harm to the patient. Under the current circumstances, many hospitals are appropriately rescheduling procedures for which the outcome will not be worsened by a surgical delay. However, the surgical complexity of abortion procedures and the associated risks increase with each passing week, and since most states impose upper limits on the gestational age at which abortion can be performed, delaying procedures will mean that many women will be unable to obtain an abortion at all.

In ordinary times, access to abortion is essential because deciding whether and when to bear a child is central to women’s self-determination and equal participation in society. During the Covid-19 pandemic, such access is even more important. Millions of women under quarantine or shelter-in-place orders may have reduced access to contraception; many ambulatory clinics have restricted or halted outpatient visits, including those for placement of contraceptive devices, and women may have difficulty traveling safely to a pharmacy. It is also possible that increased time at home will increase couples’ sexual activity. The Covid-19 response has already brought about substantial financial hardship for many families, and not having the money to support a child (or an additional child) is a leading reason that women choose to have an abortion.⁵ Finally, quarantine and shelter-in-place orders have increased intimate partner violence, which sometimes includes sexual coercion and assault that may result in unplanned pregnancies.

The medical profession’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic must include continuing to meet other urgent health care needs, including the need for time-sensitive abortion care. The speed with which some governors have suspended abortion care during this pandemic highlights the extreme vulnerability of abortion access in the United States. We believe that the current global crisis requires the medical profession to speak with a unified voice on several topics, including access to abortion care. We call for all medical professionals to stand in solidarity with ACOG and the AMA, with the women and couples who need the option of pregnancy termination, and with their colleagues who serve these patients. If the entire profession can actively support abortion care as an essential health service during the Covid-19 pandemic, such unity could form a foundation for strengthening our abortion care infrastructure for years to come.

Source: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2008006?query=RP

The courts volleyed back and forth this week, siding in turns with the state and then with abortion provider. But clinics across the state are responding inconsistently, with some shutting down altogether while they await a final answer.

A Planned Parenthood examination room in Austin. Photo credit: Eddie Gaspar/The Texas Tribune

Heather Artrip had an abortion last Friday.

The 30-year-old single mother was ready to pack up her two sons and drive to New Mexico to find a willing medical provider when she got the call from her clinic in Austin. Two days earlier, someone had called to cancel her appointment, citing the state’s ban on abortions to preserve medical resources for coronavirus patients. But this time they said they could get her a medication abortion — which involves taking pills.

“I said, ‘Can I come in now?’” Artrip said. “I was scared it would get ripped away.”

Last month, Gov. Greg Abbott announced an executive order pausing all medical procedures and surgeries that aren’t urgent in an effort to slow the spread of COVID-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus, and conserve personal protective equipment. Attorney General Ken Paxton quickly said that the governor’s order should include a ban on most abortions, setting off a legal battle and a barrage of conflicting court rulings that have created confusion for clinics and women seeking to end their pregnancies.

The courts volleyed back and forth this week, siding in turns with the state and then with abortion providers on a question that may ultimately be settled by the U.S. Supreme Court.

On Tuesday, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Paxton, allowing the near-ban to remain in place. By Thursday, a lower court weighed in to say that medication abortions like Artrip’s — which do not require personal protective gear — should still be allowed to proceed. And then on Friday afternoon, the appeals court again sided with the state, but this time allowed for some women who are further along in their pregnancies to undergo abortions even as the prohibition remains in place.

Artrip was able to get an abortion in the midst of the legal whiplash, but abortion providers across the state are responding inconsistently, with some shutting down altogether while they await a final answer.

“This is a nightmare inside of a nightmare,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, acting president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “One day patients are called back for their procedures, the next day they are canceled — all at the whim of Gov. Abbott.”

In an interview Friday with the executive director of Texas Alliance for Life, Paxton said he found it “a little shocking” that abortion providers were continuing with their suit against the state.

“This is the only group of doctors and providers that have fought it,” Paxton said. “They’re not getting treated any differently. I will admit this is very inconvenient, it’s not easy for anybody, but they’re saying no, we’re special, we don’t need to be treated like everybody else, we should be treated better.”

Abortion rights advocates worry that even as the law is still being settled, Texas GOP officials are effectively cutting off access by scaring women into thinking all abortions are illegal and scaring providers into shutting their doors.

On Wednesday, at least one clinic, Austin Women’s Health Center, was still scheduling women for medication abortions, according to an employee who picked up the phone but declined to give her name. By Friday morning, a staffer said the clinic, one of the plaintiffs in the ongoing litigation, was shutting down until they heard back from attorneys.

Also on Friday, an employee who answered the phone at Whole Woman’s Health, another plaintiff in the case, said the clinic is offering medication abortions at its locations in Austin, Fort Worth and McAllen for pregnancies up to 10 weeks gestation.

Still, several providers across the state were closed both before and after Thursday’s ruling that gave the green light to medication abortions. Many contacted by The Texas Tribune, such as Houston Women’s Clinic and Alamo Women’s Reproductive Services in San Antonio, had added temporary voicemails that said they were not offering abortion services due to Abbott’s executive order.

Personal protective equipment

Abortion rights advocates, meanwhile, say clinics should be able to continue providing pill-induced abortions in spite of the ban, which was implemented March 22 and is likely to be extended, because those types of abortions don’t use medical resources cited in the executive order.

“He [Paxton] has an interest in presenting that misinformation and letting people believe that all abortion is illegal in Texas now,” said Blake Rocap, legislative counsel at NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, which is not one of the plaintiffs in the case. “And reading what the Governor said and what the TMB [Texas Medical Board] has said and what the Fifth Circuit said, that doesn’t seem like the case legally.”

Throughout the legal battle, Paxton has argued that the state’s executive order applies to both medication and surgical abortions. In his latest court filing Friday, he again pushed for it to include abortions that involve ingesting pills.

“Respondents claim that medication abortion consumes little PPE, but, again, all PPE is valuable at this time,” he said in the filing.

Abbott’s executive order as written exempts procedures that “if performed in accordance with the commonly accepted standard of clinical practice, would not deplete the hospital capacity or the personal protective equipment needed to cope with the COVID-19 disaster.”

Artrip said her experience was totally contact-free and used “zero” personal protective gear. She and the doctor talked through the process over a video call while they sat in neighboring rooms. Then, from behind a bulletproof glass window, she was given a series of pills she would take over the course of 24 hours, along with detailed instructions.

“It’s a very simple process,” said Artrip, who had previously shared with the Tribune her struggle to get an appointment.

Daniel Grossman, an obstetrician-gynecologist, agreed that medication abortions don’t require the scarce medical safety gear.

“It is certainly safe and within the standard of care to offer medication abortion without using any personal protective equipment,” said Grossman, who is also an investigator with the Texas Policy Evaluation Project, which has been studying the executive order’s impact on abortion access.

A growing percentage of people obtaining abortions in Texas use medication abortion, those investigators report. The state’s most recent data shows medication abortions accounted for 31.6% of reported abortions among Texas residents in 2017. Procedural abortions, which use more invasive techniques, accounted for more than 60%.

Even in Texas, where patients are legally required to get a sonogram at least 24 hours before the procedure, Grossman said it is still possible to not use protective gear.

Artrip said she is relieved to have gotten an abortion, but she is angry for the women who cannot access them. Her message to women who are unsure whether they can get an abortion right now: Keep calling clinics.

“The legality of it could change at any minute,” she said. “Call every clinic until you find one that can take you, and take the one that can take you the soonest.”

Source: https://www.texastribune.org/2020/04/10/texas-abortion-law-coronavirus-confusion-clinics/?fbclid=IwAR3lp2I66kLNEFUwgOEF4qHjiXazEhjeBC0N7GjORuYnh4tJ1OwXgOa7BnA

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed an executive order banning all elective medical procedures, including abortions, during the coronavirus outbreak. The ban extends to medication abortions.
Eric Gay/AP

Governors across the country are banning elective surgery as a means of halting the spread of the coronavirus. But in a handful of states that ban is being extended to include a ban on all abortions.

So far the courts have intervened to keep most clinics open. The outlier is Texas, where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit this week upheld the governor’s abortion ban.

Four years ago, Texas was also the focus of a fierce legal fight that ultimately led to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in which the justices struck down a Texas law purportedly aimed at protecting women’s health. The court ruled the law was medically unnecessary and unconstitutional.

Now Texas is once again the epicenter of the legal fight around abortion. In other states–Ohio, Iowa, Alabama, and Oklahoma–the courts so far have sided with abortion providers and their patients.

Not so in Texas where Gov. Greg Abbott signed an executive order barring all “non-essential” medical procedures in the state, including abortion. The executive order was temporarily blocked in the district court, but the Fifth Circuit subsequently upheld the governor’s order by a 2-to-1 vote, declaring that “all public constitutional rights may be reasonably restricted to combat a public health emergency.”

“No more elective medical procedures can be done in the state because of the potential of needing both people … beds and supplies, and obviously doctors and nurses,” said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in an interview with NPR.

‘Exploiting This Crisis’

Nancy Northrup, CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, sees things very differently. “It is very clear that anti-abortion rights politicians are shamelessly exploiting this crisis to achieve what has been their longstanding ideological goal to ban abortion in the U.S.,” she said.

Paxton denies that, saying Texas “is not targeting any particular group.”
The state’s the “only goal is to protect people from dying,” he said.

Yet the American Medical Association just last week filed a brief in this case in support of abortion providers, as did 18 states, led by New York, which is the state that has been the hardest hit by the coronavirus.

They maintain that banning abortion is far more dangerous,because it will force women to travel long distances to get one. A study from the Guttmacher Institute found that people seeking abortions during the COVID-19 outbreak would have to travel up to 20 times farther than normal if states successfully ban abortion care during the pandemic. The AMA also notes that pregnant women do not stop needing medical care if they don’t get an abortion.

Northrup, of the Center for Reproductive Rights, sees this as more evidence that the ban is a calculated move by the state: what “puts the lie to this is the fact that they’re trying to ban medication, abortion as well; that’s the use of pills for abortion.

“Those do not need to take place in a clinic and they can be done, taken effectively by tele-medicine. So it shows that the real goal here, tragically, is shutting down one’s right to make the decision to end the pregnancy, not a legitimate public health response.”

‘I Was Desperate’

Affidavits filed in the Texas case tell of harrowing experiences already happening as the result of the Texas ban. One declaration was filed by a 24-year-old college student. The week she lost her part-time job as a waitress, she found out she was pregnant. She and her partner agreed they wanted to terminate the pregnancy, and on March 20 she went to a clinic in Forth Worth alone; because of social distancing rules, her partner was not allowed to go with her.

Since she was 10 weeks pregnant, still in her first trimester, she was eligible for a medication abortion. Under state law, she had to wait 24 hours before getting the pills at the clinic, but the night before her scheduled appointment, the clinic called to cancel because of Abbott’s executive order.

He partner was with her and we “cried together,” she wrote in her declaration. “I couldn’t risk the possibility that I would run out of time to have an abortion while the outbreak continued,” and it “seemed to be getting more and more difficult to travel.”

She made many calls to clinics in New Mexico and Oklahoma. The quickest option was Denver–a 12-hour drive, 780-mile drive from where she lives. Her partner was still working, so her best friend agreed to go with her. They packed sanitizing supplies and food in the car for the long drive and arrived at the Denver Clinic on March 26, where she noticed other cars with Texas plates in the parking lot, according to the affidavit.

At the clinic, she was examined, given a sonogram again, and because Colorado does not have a 24-hour waiting requirement, she was given her first abortion pill without delay and told she should try to get home within 30 hours to take the second pill.

She and her friend then turned around to go home. They were terrified she would have the abortion in the car, and tried to drive through without taking breaks. But after six hours, when it turned dark they were so exhausted they had to stop at a motel to catch some sleep. The woman finally got home and took the second pill just within the 30-hour window.

She said that despite the ordeal she was grateful she had the money, the car, the friend, and the supportive partner with a job, to make the abortion possible. Others will not be so lucky, she wrote. But “I was desperate and desperate people take desperate steps to protect themselves.”

A ‘Narrative’ Of Choice

Paxton, the Texas attorney general, does not seem moved by the time limitations that pregnancy imposes, or the hardships of traveling out of state to get an abortion. He told NPR “the narrative has always been ‘It’s a choice’ … that’s the whole narrative. I’m a little surprised by the question, given that’s always been the thing.”

On Thursday abortion providers and their patients returned to the district court in Texas instead of appealing directly to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Fifth Circuit’s ruling from earlier this week. The district court judge, who originally blocked the governor’s ban, instead narrowed the governor’s order so that medical abortions–with pills–would be exempt from the ban, as well as abortions for women who are up against the state-imposed deadline. Abortions in Texas are banned after 22 weeks.

In the end, though, this case may well be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. And because of the addition of two Trump appointees since 2016–the composition of the court is a lot more hostile to abortion rights.

Source: https://www.npr.org/2020/04/10/831273530/legal-fight-heats-up-in-texas-over-ban-on-abortions-amid-coronavirus?fbclid=IwAR0gFBxGz0K3WNL0gPeI-2iL9CZz8nY2oqljlNhxmTq2qxdKV7USe1Re3vY

Facilities that usually aim to convince women to continue pregnancies remain open in Texas, Ohio, and Alabama, where officials have issued abortion bans.

Even if a Jane’s judicial bypass case is approved, Texas’ ban on abortion has closed clinics across the state, leaving young people with limited options.

With more time at home with potentially controlling parents watching over their phone activity, young people may not even be able to seek out their full range of pregnancy options.
Shutterstock

As the COVID-19 pandemic grips our country and world, elected officials in Texas and across the country are using the crisis to further their anti-abortion agenda. This puts young people in a particularly vulnerable situation.

I am the client services manager at Jane’s Due Process, a nonprofit that helps young people navigate parental consent laws to access birth control and abortion care in Texas. We refer to the teens we serve as “Jane” to protect their anonymity. Over the last few weeks, our volunteers and I have witnessed countless examples of Janes trying to navigate our new reality in Texas, where our governor and attorney general have exploited the COVID-19 crisis to ban abortion in our state.

One Jane, who is already a parent with a toddler, said she cannot risk contracting COVID-19 to leave the state for abortion care. Instead, Jane is choosing to wait for the Texas abortion ban to lift—a decision the courts could make in the coming weeks. Another Jane told me that her grandmother, who is also her caretaker and immunocompromised because of her age, isn’t able to travel with Jane as she gets her abortion out of fear of contracting COVID-19. Therefore, like some other young pregnant people in the state, she is planning to wait out the abortion ban.

From local stay-at-home orders to Texas’ abortion ban, the COVID-19 pandemic is exacerbating the challenging barriers to abortion care that young people in Texas already face. Texas is one of 37 states with parental consent laws on abortion. Our state requires teens to obtain written consent from a parent or legal guardian before getting an abortion. If a teen cannot obtain parental consent, they must go through the judicial bypass process, which involves appearing before a judge to get special permission to obtain abortion care.

Additionally, young people often have to travel long distances, miss school or work, and cover costs out of pocket. Fortunately, the National Abortion Federation is now covering the financial costs for Janes who go through the judicial bypass process.

While judges may currently hold hearings via teleconference for judicial bypass cases as part of special court rules during COVID-19, even if a Jane’s bypass case is approved, Texas’ ban on abortion has closed clinics across the state. Due to anti-abortion politicians using a public health crisis to ban abortion, young people in Texas are left with limited options.

While we hope that young people have supportive parents they can rely on when seeking an abortion, that’s not always the case. Many of the young people we work with would be kicked out of the home if their parents discovered they were pregnant. Others are part of the foster care system or are unaccompanied minors in immigration detention facilities, so the law inherently forces them to go through the judicial bypass process.

These barriers could prove to be too much for anyone, but for young people—especially in the midst of a pandemic—they can put care entirely out of reach. Unlike most adults, young people have little freedom of movement and privacy. Before COVID-19, young people could use the excuse of school hours or after-school events to get to the multiple doctors’ appointments Texas requires for an abortion. Now, school is canceled or virtual, and with social distancing and stay-at-home orders, they may not be able to leave their home at all. And like many adults seeking abortion care, young people would prefer to get their abortions earlier in pregnancy if possible—the further along in pregnancy, the more costly their care and the more restrictions imposed by the state. But with more time at home with potentially controlling parents watching over their phone activity, young people may not even be able to seek out their full range of pregnancy options. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a delay of days or weeks can be the difference between a Jane exercising her reproductive rights or being forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.

Jane’s Due Process was founded to help teens navigate all of these steps, so we see every single day how challenging these barriers are. Our 24/7 hotline is a lifeline for so many young people right now. Teens can call or text Jane’s Due Process at 866-999-5263 and we’ll help them figure out how to get the care they need.

We are here so that young people have someone to guide them through the legal system when they have nowhere else to turn. As a case manager for all our Janes, I hear firsthand the obstacles they face, and I’m unable to see how these cruel actions could possibly be “pro-life” or how exploiting a pandemic to ban abortion benefits public health. Health-care providers agree that abortion is a time-sensitive and essential medical service that everyone should be able to access once they have made the decision to do so.

What we need from our state leaders during the COVID-19 pandemic is compassion for all pregnant people in Texas. We need expanded access to health care. We need resources so that people can care for themselves and their families. Now is not the time for Gov. Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton to play politics with our lives and futures.

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2020/04/09/this-is-how-texas-covid-19-abortion-ban-uniquely-burdens-teens/

“Not enough conversation is happening around how we transport patients and our volunteer networks that exist around the country.”

Compounding these access issues today is the risk of exposure to COVID-19 as patients travel to and from clinics, hotels, and other shared spaces to receive care.
Shutterstock

Last month, a woman took a bus from her home in Louisiana, traveling hundreds of miles to New Mexico to secure a later abortion. Three days later, her procedure complete, she was ready to return home.

Then her bus was cancelled.

With the help of volunteers from the Brigid Alliance, a national organization that provides funds and travel support to patients seeking an abortion, and which had arranged her bus travel, the woman was able to secure a flight home.

As transportation providers across the country drastically reduce or cancel their regular routes in response to the COVID-19 crisis, stories like this may become increasingly common. Amtrak and Greyhound are among the carriers that have canceled certain routes, while public transportation in cities like Madison, New Orleans, and Boston are operating on reduced schedules.

“We’ve seen the barriers that our clients face increase dramatically in size and number,” said Diana Parker, director of strategic partnerships at the Midwest Access Coalition, which provides travel support to those traveling from, to, and within the midwest for abortion care. “Under COVID-19, public transportation is, all too often, the only remaining mechanism that makes abortion access a reality in this country,” Parker explained in an email.

As the New York Times reported last year, research from the University of California, San Francisco shows that more than 11 million women across the country are further than an hour’s drive from the nearest abortion clinic. Travel requirements are among the most onerous barriers to care for people seeking an abortion, and have the potential to exacerbate already existing hurdles. This is especially true for those who are seeking care later in pregnancy, which is only available in a handful of states. Compounding these access issues today is the risk of exposure to COVID-19 as patients travel to and from clinics, hotels, and other shared spaces to receive care.

“Our clients are dealing with untangling the newfound web of clinic pre-screens and restrictions that so often push back personal abortion care timelines while increasing associated costs,” Parker said. “Clients are also dealing with … perhaps more obvious hurdles, such as more complicated travel itineraries, round-the-clock childcare needs, sky-rocketing costs, and an increased sense of isolation.”

Her team’s days, Parker explained, are now full with last-minute pivots thanks to various anti-choice directives and injunctions that come down each day, sometimes multiple times a day. Just last week, Texas’ COVID-19 abortion ban was blocked by a judge on Monday but then reinstated by an appeals court one day later.

Restrictions imposed by COVID-19 have already led to a drop in the number of patients at some clinics nationwide. The Hope Clinic for Women in Granite City, Illinois, has seen a 10 percent decrease in the number of patients seeking an appointment over the past three weeks. “Show rates” for those who do make an appointment, however, have risen from 50 percent to 85 percent, suggesting pregnant people may be increasingly unsure of their ability to access an abortion in the future. Meanwhile, Karen Duda, coordinator of the Haven Coalition in New York City, reports that requests for help from her organization have gone down “dramatically” in the past two-and-a-half weeks, since the first stay-at-home orders were issued for the state. The organization provides lodging and clinic escort services to people traveling to the city to have an abortion.

Alison Dreith, deputy director of the Hope Clinic, told Rewire.News that she believes in the coming weeks and months, it will “most certainly” become more difficult to provide care for patients outside of her clinic’s community in the greater St. Louis metropolitan area. “We see patients from around the country,” Dreith said. “It was already really difficult to get to us.”

But other practical support providers are facing greater demand for their services amid the ever-changing landscape of the coronavirus pandemic. “Our work has grown and is growing,” said Odile Schalit, executive director of the Brigid Alliance. “The thing about COVID is that it really hits at the heart of practical support work and how critical it is to accessing abortion care … [COVID-19] just asks us to do more of it and under more stress and with greater concern for safety of all different kinds.” The group is also anticipating a rise in the need for later abortion care, as more patients experience a delay in access to services.

Though Parker reports the Midwest Access Coalition has seen its highest-ever client volume in March 2020 alone, the coronavirus has forced the group to suspend its 200-strong volunteer host-and-driver program, exponentially increasing the organization’s operating costs and the level of complexity of case work. “Right now, we’re booking clients expensive hotel stays and ride-shares, and doing our best to stay afloat,” Parker said. 

The Brigid Alliance has lost long-standing relationships with some hotels, but they are either closed or at half-capacity because of COVID-19. “We have fewer options,” Odile said.

But as the country’s transportation infrastructure continues to contract, reaching an accommodation and abortion care is increasingly complicated.

Practical support providers like Odile and Parker are pivoting to rental cars as a favored method of travel, but the shift requires different considerations than securing a ticket on a bus, train, or plane. It’s an option that depends on a litany of privileges, including having a driver’s license. “The majority of our clients either don’t own cars, aren’t old enough to easily rent a car, or don’t have the funds to pay the up-front costs that go along with car rental,” though these costs would later be reimbursed, Parker said.

These questions are not just limited to transportation to and from a city where a clinic is located, but to the clinic itself. Dreith explained that patients, who are often under sedation, don’t necessarily want to use rideshares such as Uber or Lyft, and may be uncomfortable navigating public transport in an unfamiliar place.

“It’s a really concerning time,” said Dreith, referring to the risks faced by practical support organizations and their volunteers. “Not enough conversation is happening around how we transport patients and our volunteer networks that exist around the country.”

Recently, a patient at the Hope Clinic needed a volunteer to transport them from their appointment; one was found on a second try. “That was something that came with a really conscious and heavy heart to even be able to ask someone to do that, knowing the risks that could put people in,” Dreith said

“In a moment like this, we’re all now questioning how we leave our homes. We’re all now questioning the safety of getting on a train or getting in a car or going to the doctor,” Schalit said. “It is an opportune moment right now for those of us with privilege to consider and really feel what for years have been the realities and the barriers and the fears that people trying to access abortion care have faced.”

Source: https://rewire.news/article/2020/04/06/when-the-abortion-clinic-is-open-but-you-have-no-way-to-get-there/

NI Secretary Brandon Lewis said women from the region can continue to travel to England to access terminations despite lockdown.

Strict abortion laws were overturned following a change to the law voted in at Westminster last year (PA)

Stormont’s leaders have clashed over the prospect of allowing women in Northern Ireland access to home abortions during the coronavirus outbreak.

Deputy First Minister Michelle O’Neill called for the introduction of telemedicine services during the crisis, but First Minister Arlene Foster has reiterated her opposition to “abortion on demand”.

While a new legal framework to allow terminations in the region came into effect at the end of last month, the services have not yet been rolled out.

Women seeking terminations in the interim have been advised to travel to Great Britain.

However, restrictions on travel due to coronavirus have placed the arrangement into difficulty.

I don’t think it’s any secret that I don’t believe that abortion on demand should be available in Northern IrelandArlene Foster

During the Covid-19 emergency, women in the early stages of pregnancy in England, Scotland and Wales are able to secure abortion medication from a doctor through telemedicine services.

Pro-choice campaigners have called for this provision to be introduced in Northern Ireland as well.

Health Minister Robin Swann has responsibility for the issue, but any move to introduce the measure will require the agreement of the wider powersharing executive.

The issue was discussed at a meeting of the Stormont Executive on Monday.

Anti-abortion protesters stage a silent demonstration at Stormont against the liberalisation of abortion laws (Brian Lawless/PA)

Afterwards, Mrs Foster said she would not give a running commentary on the executive’s deliberations. She said a “full discussion” was required.

“The Health minister will bring papers forward and we will have discussions in relation to those papers,” she said.

“But I don’t think it’s any secret that I don’t believe that abortion on demand should be available in Northern Ireland.

“I think it’s a very retrograde step for our society here in Northern Ireland instead of supporting people who find themselves in crisis pregnancies, we’re not even having any discussion around that and how we can support people in those circumstances, how we can provide perinatal care.”

This is about compassionate healthcare, this is about making sure that we have supports here for women who find themselves in a vulnerable situationMichelle O’Neill

Ms O’Neill said the service should be available to Northern Ireland women.

“I support telemedicine,” she said.

“What we’re talking about is compassionate healthcare, modern healthcare for women.

“What we’re talking about is responding to women’s need at the time of global crisis – women shouldn’t be left out in terms of supports that are put in place.

“And so the regulations that have went through Westminster, the legislation that’s went through, needs to be implemented here.

“Obviously this is about compassionate healthcare, this is about making sure that we have supports here for women who find themselves in a vulnerable situation.

“So the health minister has an obligation to put in place those regulations and to put in place the mechanisms in order to make sure those supports are there for women as has been legislated for.”

There has been anger among the pro-choice lobby that the Stormont Executive has not yet set up termination services.

Alliance for Choice expressed frustration and claimed Stormont is “blocking” abortion services.

Naomi Connor, Alliance for Choice co-convenor in Belfast, said: “The World Health Organisation notes that abortion is essential healthcare in a pandemic, and yet the Northern Ireland Office and the Department of Health in NI have found it acceptable to do absolutely nothing, except to release videos extolling travel to England for treatment, when the reality of clinic accessibility is limited to an eight-hour each-way freight ferry with no companions and only for those who are not quarantined or self-isolating.”

Earlier Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis said travel is currently appropriate for medical needs.

“Travel should only be for essential travel, one of those key points is a medical need or the need to provide medical care and support to other people. So if there is a medical need for someone to travel, that is something that is appropriate within the guidelines,” he told the BBC.

Source: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/foster-and-oneill-clash-over-prospect-of-ni-telemedicine-abortions-39105889.html?fbclid=IwAR2x2LoPkZma4Q91jeP9An4NBDIZ6m0USG1CiYZFhNAAuDbZa7s63CXPsbg