Can Medical-Legal Partnerships Do More to Advance Reproductive Justice After Dobbs?

The medical-legal partnership (MLP) and reproductive justice (RJ) movements both seek to solve complex problems, serve diverse populations with intersectional challenges, and resolve community conditions that impact people's ability to reach their highest health potential. Yet MLPs have been overlooked as a strategy to advance reproductive health and justice. MLP has distinct advantages for advancing RJ, and many MLPs might already be doing RJ work without referring to it by name. By intentionally adopting an RJ strategy and explicitly addressing the unmet social and legal needs that limit people's ability to plan their reproductive futures, MLPs can better serve their clients and contribute to the movement to combat reproductive oppression.

Constitutional enshrinement as a way of safeguarding abortion rights: The case of France.

France's landmark constitutional amendment in 2024 enshrines abortion freedom in its supreme legal framework, representing a profound milestone against the backdrop of shifting global political and social attitudes toward abortion. This decision, influenced by disruptive events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the overturning of constitutional abortion rights in the United States, places France to the forefront of protecting abortion access. Despite ongoing challenges in accessing services in certain areas and circumstances, this amendment sets a precedent for other nations considering similar protections. We offer key insights into this case and reflect on how it can potentially shape legislative trends in abortion rights worldwide.

The IAPM New York 2024 declaration on professional responsibility and abortion.

The International Academy of Perinatal Medicine (IAPM) firmly supports abortion as a fundamental reproductive right, as declared at their annual meeting on June 28, 2024, in New York City. This stance, grounded in professional responsibility, respects both autonomy and beneficence-based obligations to pregnant patients and fetal patients. The IAPM asserts that access to safe, legal abortion services is essential for gender equality, public health, and social justice. Their declaration aligns with international human rights standards, advocating for abortion legalization up to fetal viability and beyond in cases of maternal health risks or severe fetal anomalies. This comprehensive approach underscores the critical role of healthcare professionals in providing compassionate reproductive healthcare, aiming to reduce maternal mortality and improve public health outcomes globally.

The Ninth Amendment: An Underutilized Protection for Reproductive Choice.

Concern about individual rights and the desire to protect them has been part of our nation since its founding, and continues to be so today. The Ninth Amendment was created to assuage the Framers' concerns that enumerating some rights in the Bill of Rights would leave unenumerated rights unrecognized and unprotected, affirming that those rights are not disparaged or denied by their lack of textual support. The Ninth Amendment has appeared infrequently in our jurisprudence, and Courts initially construed it rather narrowly. But starting in the 1960s, the Ninth Amendment emerged as a powerful tool not just for recognizing unanticipated rights, but for protecting or expanding even enumerated rights. The right to privacy--encompassing the right to contraception and abortion--the right to preserve the integrity of your family, the right to vote, the right to own a firearm as an individual--all these rights have been asserted under and found to be supported by the Ninth Amendment. In its Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health decision overturning Roe, the Supreme Court found that there is no right to abortion because it is not in the Constitution. But the potential of the Ninth Amendment is such that reproductive choice need not be mentioned in the Constitution to be protected. Reproductive choice may rightfully be considered as part of a right to privacy, an unenumerated right that nevertheless has abundant precedent behind it. The Ninth Amendment, and its counterparts found in many state constitutions, has the power to protect not just reproductive choice, but all of our fundamental rights.

Bridging the Knowledge Gap: A Toolkit on Reproductive Rights for Pediatric Surgeons in the Post-Dobbs Era.

BACKGROUND: The ripple effect of the Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization has impacted physicians and patients across numerous medical specialties. In pediatric surgery, the patient population ranges from fetus to the pregnant patient. There is a gap in the knowledge of pediatric surgeons regarding abortion laws and access. This project aims to bridge the gap by creating access to reliable resources which may be used to optimize patient care and support physicians. METHODS: We collaborated with the Reproductive Health Coalition, co-founded by the American Medical Women's Association and Doctors for America, to curate a list of resources beneficial to pediatric surgeons. RESULTS: We created a web-based toolkit with the purpose of providing easily accessible and reliable information on reproductive rights in the United States. We identified up-to-date resources on state-by-state abortion laws, legal resources, patient-centered information on obtaining abortion care, and resources for physicians interested in getting involved in advocacy. CONCLUSION: Pediatric surgery rests at a critical juncture with respect to reproductive rights in the United States. Our toolkit enables users to understand the current climate and identify next steps to advocate for patients and physicians amidst a formidable legal environment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

The Alabama Embryo Decision-The Politics and Reality of Recognizing "Extrauterine Children".

This Viewpoint discusses the Alabama Supreme Court's opinion on in vitro fertilization and how it plays into a larger push for fetal and embryonic personhood.

Sex Reassignment Surgery, Marriage, and Reproductive Rights of Intersex and Transgender People in Sunni Islam.

The traditional gender binary constitutes an integral aspect of Islamic social ethics, which has a pivotal role in shaping religious obligations, legal proceedings, and interpersonal judgments within Muslim communities. Within the familial sphere, this gender binary underscores fundamental responsibilities encompassing parenthood, filial duties, and inheritance rights. Recent years have witnessed a growing challenge to the traditional concept of the gender binary within Islamic societies. This shift is driven by increasing social libertarianism that emphasizes gender fluidity and individual choice. Hence, this article aims to critically scrutinize evolving discussions and controversies about the rights of intersex and transgender individuals, particularly issues relating to sex reassignment or gender-affirming surgery, marriage, and reproduction, from the perspective of the Sunni tradition of Islam. To support the various interpretations and insights presented here, a comprehensive and rigorous analysis is carried out on various religious texts and scholarly sources to elucidate the theological and jurisprudential positions on gender issues. It is thus concluded that Shariah offers greater flexibility in the treatment of intersex individuals compared to those with gender dysphoria because the intersex condition is viewed as a physical impairment that is not the choice of the afflicted individual. By contrast, in the case of individuals with gender dysphoria, they are willfully attempting to change their recognized biological sex, that God had naturally given to them at birth. Therefore, it is recommended that such transgender individuals deserve respectful psychological and social rehabilitation with help and guidance from religious authorities, their families, and communities.

¿Vulneración del derecho a decidir entre parto natural o cesárea?: Análisis de la Sentencia 233/2023, 22 de febrero Juzgado de lo Contencioso Administrativo número 5 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria / [Violation of the right to decide between natural birth or cesarean section?: Analysis of Sentence 233/2023, February 22, Contentious Administrative Court number 5 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria]

A través del presente comentario se analiza la Sentencia del Juzgado de lo Contencioso Administrativo número 5 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, de 22 de febrero de 2023, ECLI:ES:JCA:2023:1039; en la que se condena al Servicio Canario de Salud a indemnizar a una mujer con un millón de euros por vulnerar su derecho a decidir entre parto natural o cesárea e imponer un parto gemelar natural prolongado hasta 17 horas que tuvo como consecuencia una lesión cerebral irreversible. (AU)

Through this commentary, the Judgment of the Administrative Court number 5 of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, dated February 22, 2023, ECLI:ES:JCA:2023:1039, is analyzed. In this judgment, the Canarian Health Service is condemned to compensate a woman with one million euros for violating her right to choose between natural childbirth or cesarean section, and imposing a prolonged natural twin birth lasting up to 17 hours, which resulted in irreversible brain damage. (AU)

Building a Progressive Reproductive Law in South Africa.

This article delves into the expansion of procreative freedom in relation to assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) in South African law, with reference to three seminal cases. In the case of AB v. Minister of Social Development, the minority of the South African Constitutional Court held that the constitutional right to procreative freedom is applicable to ARTs. Importantly, both the minority and the majority agreed on the principle of procreative non-maleficence-the principle that harm to the prospective child constitutes a legitimate reason to limit the procreative freedom of the prospective parents. Following this, Ex Parte KF2 clarified the concept of the "prospective child" as relating to an idea, rather than an embryo. Finally, in Surrogacy Advisory Group v. Minister of Health, the controversial issue of preimplantation sex selection for non-medical reasons was examined. The court confirmed that the use of ARTs falls within the ambit of procreative freedom. While holding that preimplantation sex selection for non-medical reasons is inherently sexist, the court found that a woman's right to procreative freedom-including the sex identification of an in vitro embryo-outweighs other considerations. These landmark cases establish a robust groundwork for a progressive reproductive law in South Africa.

Advancing Birth Equity in a Post-Dobbs US.

This Viewpoint discusses the US Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, describes how that decision threatens birth equity for some racial and social groups, and suggests a reproductive justice approach to address racial and social inequalities and ensure reproductive freedom and autonomy for all people.

Hacia una atención de calidad integral en las maternidades con perspectiva de derechos humanos / Towards a comprehensive quality of care in birthing facilities with human rights perspective

Resumen La calidad de la atención obstétrica hoy no solo se limita a tener profesionales con competencias técnicas basadas en evidencia científica, sino que incluye la atención centrada en la mujer, persona gestante y su familia, como expresión del respeto de sus derechos humanos. Este artículo revisa cómo el tema ha sido abordado globalmente y nacionalmente desde la Conferencia de Fortaleza en 1985 hasta la presentación reciente de proyectos de ley en el parlamento chileno.

Abstract Obstetric quality of care today means not only having skilled providers with evidence-based competences but it includes woman, pregnant person and family-centered reproductive health as expression of respect of their human rights. This article reviews how this issue has been approached in a global and national level since Fortaleza Conference in 1985 until recent bills of law proposed before Chilean parliament.

In re: the disposition of frozen embryos: 2022.

Debates regarding reproductive rights have waxed and waned since the early twentieth century. The current front-and-center debate draws this discussion into tighter focus. Challenges to reproductive rights, changes in definitions of personhood and a pending decision regarding Roe v Wade could change the management and options regarding the disposition of frozen embryos. This commentary outlines how changes in abortion law and reproductive rights could potentially impact the options available to both patients and clinics.