Ohio anti-abortion rights lobby files complaint against company for telehealth abortion services
(Getty Images)
An Ohio anti-abortion rights lobby reported a reproductive care website to the state's Department of Health, in an attempt to address what the lobbying group called 'harmful circumvention of Ohio's laws.' Those laws have been unenforceable by court order since last year.
The complaint was filed by Ohio Right to Life's director of external and legislative affairs, Emma Martinez, who asked that the state look into the website Hey Jane for potential violations of Ohio Revised Code.
The law that the website was accused of violating requires physicians to be 'physically present at the location where the initial dose of the (medication abortion) drug or regimen of drugs is consumed at the time the initial dose is consumed,' according to the Ohio Revised Code language.
Hey Jane expanded its services to Ohio in February, and has been working in reproductive and sexual health spaces, providing mifepristone, the FDA-approved abortion medication, since it was approved for mail-order distribution in 2021. Its website touts the ability to conduct virtual care through chat, phone, or video appointments, with some services covered by insurance.
Along with medication abortion services, the website also provides help accessing birth control, emergency contraception, and treatment for urinary tract infections, yeast infections, bacterial vaginosis, and herpes.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The company says patients can access its services if they are at least 18 years old, medically eligible for the services and are currently in the states of Ohio, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, or Washington. Residency in those states is not required, according to Hey Jane.
'It is our opinion that Heyjane.com works to deliver pills without any type of physical exam by a physician,' Ohio Right to Life's Martinez wrote in a letter addressed to Dr. Bruce Vanderhoff, head of the Ohio Department of Health. 'In so doing, this website provides dangerous pharmaceuticals without the legally required physician oversight.'
But a Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas ruling in September 2024 left state laws hindering mail-order abortion medication unenforceable. Judge Alison Hathaway temporarily blocked a law that limited the prescription, method, and time during pregnancy in which mifepristone could be distributed.
The court decision was noted in the Ohio Department of Health's response to the complaint, in which Tyler Herrmann, general counsel for the health department, said the agency 'appreciates the effort of Ohio Right to Life in bringing these matters to our attention.'
However, the department stated the law mentioned is a 'criminal statute under which ODH is provided no enforcement authority.'
'This matter would be more appropriately directed to the State Medical Board of Ohio and the Ohio Attorney General's Office,' Herrmann wrote, adding that the health department had shared the complaint with those offices.
Among the State Medical Board of Ohio's members is Mike Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life.
Gonidakis was originally appointed to the position in 2012 by then-Gov. John Kasich, an appointment that was renewed by Gov. Mike DeWine in 2022. Gonidakis' current term on the board lasts until 2027.
The Ohio Right to Life complaint also questions the information the website provides, and says there is 'no evidence that Hey Jane complies with Ohio's long-standing law of reporting the abortions they are facilitating.'
Herrmann said the department 'has been in communication with the company to remind them of this obligation,' and plans to 'closely monitor the issue going forward.'
Hey Jane's co-founder and CEO, Kiki Freedman, said the complaint was 'without merit,' but expressed appreciation to Ohio Right to Life for drawing attention to the company's expansion into Ohio, noting the small number of in-person clinics in the state, which currently stands at 11, 'amid increased demand for safe abortion care.'
Despite the appreciation, 'we are disturbed and disappointed by their intentional effort to misinform and mislead Ohioans about the legality of Hey Jane's care in Ohio,' Freedman told the Capital Journal in a statement.
'It is deeply important to Hey Jane that Ohioans have access to accurate, factual information that allows them to make informed decisions about accessing high-quality and safe abortion care,' Freedman said.
While the court order has temporarily allowed telehealth abortion care, Democratic legislators are trying to codify the care, hoping to add a layer of protection on top of those enshrined in the 2023 state constitutional amendment which includes abortion rights among those established in the state's founding document.
State Rep. Anita Somani, D-Dublin, re-introduced a bill recently to codify reproductive rights under House Bill 128. In the bill, 'reproductive health care and related services may be provided as telehealth services.'
The bill also looks to repeal laws currently in Ohio Revised Code that prohibit or regulate abortion care in a way that bill sponsors feel goes against the constitutional amendment.
Regulations other than the telehealth law include a 24-hour waiting period required before an abortion procedure, a minimum of two physician appointments before the procedure can occur and regulations on hospital transfer agreements for physicians who also provide care at reproductive care clinics.
The bill was introduced at the end of February and referred to the House Health Committee, where it has yet to receive a hearing.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Health New England to replace Humira coverage with lower-cost biosimilars
SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (WWLP) – Health New England announced Monday that it will shift coverage of the biologic drug Humira to more affordable FDA-approved biosimilars starting next month for members of its commercial health plans. Markey playing defense against GOP clean energy plans Effective July 1, the not-for-profit health insurer will cover Amjevita by Nuvaila and Hadlima instead of Humira, as part of a broader effort to manage rising health care costs while maintaining access to effective treatments. Humira is used to treat several chronic inflammatory conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, and plaque psoriasis. 'Biologic medications like Humira are complex treatments that carry significant cost. Its biosimilars provide a meaningful opportunity to enhance affordability for the health care ecosystem while members continue to get the full benefits of the medication,' said Gary Tereso, PharmD, Director of Pharmacy Services at Health New England. Biologic drugs are made from living organisms and are typically more expensive than other medications. Biosimilars are developed to be nearly identical in safety, potency, and efficacy to the original biologic, but at a significantly lower cost. The shift in coverage is intended to make treatment more accessible and financially sustainable for members and employer groups alike. Health New England is directly reaching out to members who are currently prescribed Humira, along with their health care providers and pharmacies, to assist with the transition. The company said it will continue monitoring the biosimilar marketplace to ensure members receive both high-quality care and cost-effective treatment options. WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Medscape
4 hours ago
- Medscape
Part D Cancer Drug Launch Prices Soar Past Inflation
Launch prices for Medicare Part D anticancer drugs have risen sharply since 2012, with a mean increase of $1694 per year. In 2025, the observed prices were 15%-200% higher than expected if the increases were due to inflation alone, but the gap between observed and inflation-adjusted prices narrowed over the study period. METHODOLOGY: The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduced price negotiation for Medicare-covered drugs and required manufacturers to pay rebates to Medicare for price increases above inflation. But it did not address the launch prices of new drugs. Anticancer drugs, a protected drug class with mandatory Medicare Part D coverage, may now be especially prone to higher launch prices, in part because the Inflation Reduction Act limits out-of-pocket spending and price increases after market entry. Researchers identified 86 branded, self-administered, molecularly targeted anticancer therapies approved by the FDA between January 2010 and December 2024. Data on drug prices were obtained from the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Formulary and adjusted for inflation. The researchers looked at launch prices by year and compared drug prices in 2025 with those expected if launch prices had increased due to inflation alone since the drug's market entry. TAKEAWAY: The mean monthly launch price increased from $10,954 for drugs first observed in the Medicare formulary in 2012-2014 to $27,891 for drugs first observed in 2023-2025. After adjusting for inflation, the mean launch price increased by $1694 per year ( P < .001). < .001). In 2025, actual drug prices were 14.8%-200.9% higher than expected if they had only kept pace with inflation. Although the gap between observed and inflation-adjusted prices narrowed over time, price increases continued to outpace inflation in 2023 and 2024, despite the Inflation Reduction Act rebate requirement, which will result in rebates to Medicare starting in fall 2025. IN PRACTICE: 'Launch prices for self-administered targeted anticancer therapies have grown precipitously, although no evidence was found of disproportionate increases in recent years. Instead, continued launch price growth for anticancer therapies was observed, consistent with prior research,' the study authors wrote. 'This suggests that companies were already engaging in price maximization for anticancer therapies and continued to do so after the implementation of the [Inflation Reduction Act].' SOURCE: This study, led by Stacie B. Dusetzina, PhD, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tennessee, was published online in JAMA . LIMITATIONS: This study used example indications to determine monthly doses and pricing. Additionally, variations in available price measures were noted over the study period. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Arnold Ventures. Several authors reported receiving grants or personal fees and having other ties with various sources.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
COVID Crusader Writes Open Letter To RFK Jr On mRNA
A prominent group of health activists is threatening a political revolt against HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over what they call a betrayal of their movement's central cause. In a blistering open letter dated June 4, COVID crusader Dr. Mary Talley Bowden and several allies from the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) movement — a grassroots coalition of vaccine-critical and medical freedom activists — accused Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary of watering down policies related to the controversial mRNA vaccine platform, especially in guidance affecting children and pregnant women. 'We did not fight for you to be in positions of leadership so that our clearly stated policy goals would suffer a 'bait and switch,'' Bowden wrote, warning Kennedy that MAHA voters 'can walk away' if their demands are not met. The letter criticizes recent CDC and FDA policy changes, calling them deceptive and insufficient, and claims the administration is engaging in 'linguistic misdirections' to hide the continued recommendation of mRNA shots for vulnerable populations. The MAHA letter insists the mRNA platform — particularly COVID vaccines — should be pulled from the market entirely, citing adverse event data and peer-reviewed studies. It demands sweeping reforms: a full ban on mRNA technologies, repeal of the PREP Act, elimination of vaccine-related conflicts of interest in federal agencies, and an end to direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. The signatories include author Naomi Wolf, podcaster Shannon Joy, and several other activists who rose to prominence during the COVID-19 pandemic by challenging government vaccine narratives. The backlash comes amid growing scrutiny of RFK Jr.'s recent actions as HHS secretary. Once one the nation's most vocal mRNA vaccine skeptic, Kennedy has walked a careful line in office, telling Congress in May that his personal views on vaccines are 'irrelevant' and vowing not to make sudden changes to CDC policy. 'I don't think people should be taking medical advice from me,' Kennedy told lawmakers, as reported by The Hill on June 2. Still, his critics on both sides see Kennedy's recent moves as consequential. Late last month, he released a 58-second video on X stating that COVID vaccines for healthy children and healthy pregnant women had been removed from the CDC's immunization schedule — a declaration Bowden and others say was misleading. Indeed, as The Hill previously reported, the CDC quietly changed its guidance to say healthy children may receive the COVID vaccine after consultation with a healthcare provider, while maintaining stronger recommendations for other vulnerable categories. For pregnant women, the recommendation was similarly softened but not eliminated, and pregnancy remains classified by the FDA as a high-risk health condition, allowing continued vaccine use under certain circumstances. Bowden's letter zeroes in on this ambiguity, arguing that wordplay is being used to sustain vaccine availability under the appearance of reform. 'Pregnant women have not been made any safer by your wordplay,' she writes, warning that MAHA activists are prepared to run their own candidates in upcoming elections if their demands are ignored. The political threat underscores the friction between Kennedy and the movement that once celebrated his nomination. While Kennedy has taken steps to reshape HHS in ways consistent with his skepticism — including canceling hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for Moderna's mRNA flu vaccine— his first few months of actions have not thus far rendered the swift action that some would have hoped. Former CDC acting director Dr. Richard Besser and other public health experts have voiced alarm at Kennedy's willingness to circumvent the CDC's vaccine advisory panel, which has traditionally guided immunization policy through public, evidence-based deliberation. 'We're seeing a total side-stepping of the nation's leading public health agency,' Besser told The Hill. The vaccine panel has not yet weighed in on the updated COVID shot guidance. Its next meeting is scheduled for late June, and observers expect tense debate over whether Kennedy's changes represent science-based reform or political overreach. In the meantime, Bowden's warning reflects the fragile coalition Kennedy is attempting to hold together. The MAHA movement — built in part from disaffected MAGA voters, vaccine skeptics, and parents concerned about government overreach — played a pivotal role in rallying support for Kennedy's confirmation and the broader medical freedom agenda. Now, its leaders are openly questioning whether Kennedy's tenure will deliver the systemic change they demand — or whether they were simply used to fuel a political ascent. 'MAHA is not the possession of Secretary Kennedy,' Bowden wrote. 'It is the voice of millions of desperate parents… and their activism will outlast any administration.' The Dallas Express reached out to HHS but did not immediately receive a response. Kennedy previously spoke to The Dallas Express about a lawsuit Bowden brought against the FDA for misleading the public about using ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 during his presidential campaign in 2024 and just after the FDA settled the case. 'All three of the principal health agencies [CDC, NIH, FDA] suffer from agency capture,' Kennedy said. 'I would say 50% of the FDA's budget is from pharmaceutical companies. NIH scientists are allowed to collect royalties on drugs that they regulate –– which is clearly a conflict of interest. CDC … has devolved into an agency that primarily promotes the mercantile interests of the pharmaceutical companies.' He told DX that the agencies are overly influenced by perverse incentives from the pharmaceutical industry and added, 'I will change those incentives and unravel the culture of corruption that now has turned these agencies against public health.'
