How The Supreme Court Could Endanger Access to Emergency Abortion Care
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, is a statute passed by Congress in 1986 to ensure that nobody who is experiencing a medical emergency is turned away from receiving health care. But this week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments challenging EMTALA as it relates to emergency abortion care. Katie O’Connor, Director of Federal Abortion Policy at the National Women’s Law Center sits down to talk with us about the potential impacts of this ruling.
Under EMTALA, an emergency medical condition is defined “as a condition in which, without immediate medical attention, a patient's health or life is in serious jeopardy.” The statute does not make exceptions for state law, the personal beliefs of providers, or hospitals of religious affiliation. For pregnant people, abortion care can be a very necessary, time-sensitive, and sometimes life-saving health service. State-level abortion bans are already forcing patients to travel hours and long distances to receive care, and providers to leave the hostile states they are practicing in. EMTALA’s ruling may narrow, even more, the already constricted landscape that patients and providers find themselves navigating in the United States—especially for those who are experiencing an emergency.
Follow Us on Social:
Twitter: @rePROsFightBack
Instagram: @reprosfb
Facebook: rePROs Fight Back
Email us: jennie@reprosfightback.com
Rate and Review on Apple Podcast
Thanks for listening & keep fighting back!