Despite Trump directive, emergency abortion care is still a legal right
In the days since the Trump administration rescinded federal guidance tied to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, EMTALA, a wave of alarming headlines has swept across social media:
'Trump just made it legal for hospitals to let pregnant people die.'
'Emergency rooms can now refuse life-saving abortion care.'
As a clinician, I know that isn't true. As a reproductive health strategist, I know those headlines are dangerous. And we all know what happens next: confusion, delay, and harm. Let's be clear — EMTALA is still in effect.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act requires hospitals to provide stabilizing emergency care to all patients, regardless of their ability to pay. That includes emergency abortion when it's the necessary treatment to prevent serious harm or death, even in states with abortion bans.
What was rescinded is the Biden-era guidance — a post-Roe clarification that reinforced these obligations and gave clinicians added protections in legally ambiguous states. Without it, hospitals and providers are left to navigate complexity and risk on their own. And in emergency medicine, hesitation can be deadly.
When a provider has to stop and ask, 'Will I get sued or arrested for doing what I know is right?' that delay can cost a life.
Complications can escalate in minutes. And legal fear, not clinical doubt, can make even experienced clinicians pause.
We don't need to wait for another preventable tragedy. We need to act now. We must correct the fear-based narrative and demand clarity and courage from our hospitals.
More opinion: Elon Musk-Trump spat on X is a distraction from the failures of DOGE
Well meaning advocates and organizations have flooded timelines with warnings suggesting emergency abortion care is no longer available. The fear is valid. But the messaging is misleading, and that matters.
When headlines tell the public that hospitals are 'allowed to let women die,' we create a different kind of emergency — one rooted in mistrust. Patients internalize those messages. They begin to doubt the health care system. They wonder if anyone will help them. Some bleed at home instead of going to the ER.
I've already heard from patients who are scared to seek emergency care because they believe hospitals will turn them away. That fear isn't irrational — it's the natural outcome of a system that has failed too many women, including Amber Nicole Thurman, who died in Georgia after being denied abortion care during a miscarriage. Her story is one of several that underscore just how high the stakes are.
And it affects health care providers too. When social media, national news and even advocacy organizations circulate panic without context, our instinct is to pause and wonder if the legal ground has shifted again.
In medicine, uncertainty delays care. And in emergency medicine, that delay can be fatal.
Here's what's still true:
EMTALA is still in effect.
Hospitals are still required to provide abortion when it's the necessary emergency treatment.
Patients still have the right to receive stabilizing care.
But rights only matter if people trust they can use them, and clinicians can only act if they trust their institutions will back them up.
We must sound the alarm, but we cannot afford to fuel panic. Because fear doesn't just spread — it paralyzes. And that paralysis costs lives.
While courts and lawmakers dominate the headlines, we must remember that hospital systems are power players, too. They're institutions with boards, reputations, legal teams and responsibility.
Every hospital in the U.S. — especially those in abortion-restricted states — should be urgently reviewing their EMTALA protocols, issuing clear guidance to staff and publicly affirming that abortion will be provided when medically necessary.
Silence from leadership isn't neutrality. It's complicity — and it's deadly.
Providers need to know they'll be protected for doing their jobs. Patients need to know their care won't be delayed by legal ambiguity. The moment of crisis is not the time to call a lawyer or fumble through a policy binder. Hospitals must act before the next emergency, not after.
We have a constitutional mandate. Let's lead like it.
In 2022, Michigan voters passed Proposal 3 by a wide margin, enshrining the right to reproductive freedom, including abortion, into our state constitution. That makes this moment even easier for our hospitals — a no-brainer, if you will.
We have legal clarity. We have the public mandate. Now we have a responsibility to lead by example for the rest of the country.
We've seen what happens when hospitals fail to lead. A ProPublica investigation in Texas found that after the state's abortion ban took effect, the sepsis rate among pregnant patients in Houston surged by 63%. In Dallas — where hospitals empowered doctors to act — it rose by just 29%. The difference? Hospital policy.
Some institutions supported their clinicians. Others left them to weigh legal risk against patient safety. People suffered. Some died.
Michigan's hospitals don't face the same legal barriers. We've enshrined reproductive rights into our constitution. The only question now is whether our institutions will rise to meet this moment — not just for Michiganders, but as a model for the nation.
We have the opportunity to set a precedent of leadership. Of valor. Of honoring the Hippocratic Oath and protecting half of our population. This is a chance to show that when legal clarity and public support align, health systems don't hesitate — they lead.
To Corewell Health, Henry Ford Health, Trinity Health Michigan, McLaren Health Care, Michigan Medicine and the Detroit Medical Center: this is your moment.
Issue clear EMTALA guidance. Protect your providers. Affirm your commitment to emergency abortion care loudly and publicly.
And to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer: Michigan has already set a national example by enshrining reproductive freedom into our state constitution. Now, we need your leadership again. Issue state-based guidance that reinforces EMTALA protections and directs hospitals to act swiftly and decisively when patients need life-saving abortion care.
Then go one step further.
Call on your fellow governors, especially in states where abortion is banned. Governors like Andy Beshear in Kentucky. If they said they were 'sending it back to the states,' then let's show them what the states can do. Let's show the country what leadership looks like when it centers care, not politics.
Because silence is not safety, and neutrality is not leadership.
More opinion: Democrats better hope Michigan Gov. Whitmer changes her mind about presidential run
If you're reading this from another state, you're not powerless.
Call your local hospital and ask if they have clear EMTALA guidance for emergency pregnancy care. Push your lawmakers to require transparency and protect providers. Share accurate information — panic spreads fast, but facts save lives. Support front-line providers who are navigating unclear laws with courage.
Even without constitutional protections, your voice can demand clarity, accountability and care. Hospitals everywhere need to hear it.
Nikki Vinckier is an OBGYN physician assistant, reproductive rights advocate and founder of Take Back Trust, a national patient education platform helping people navigate and protect their reproductive health care.
This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Emergency abortion still a legal right despite Trump move | Opinion
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump Admin Brings Back Hundreds of CDC Staffers it Previously Fired
The Trump administration is reversing its decision to fire hundreds of staffers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in a humiliating about-turn. A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) told STAT that the CDC will be bringing back more than 450 employees that were fired in an attempt to reorganize the agency. Some of the departments that will be reinstating employees are: The National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and Tuberculosis Prevention; the Global Health Center; the National Center for Environmental Health; the Immediate Office of the Director. These divisions helped track and prevent HIV, prevent lead poisoning in children, as well as ensure that cruise lines were safe from disease. HHS, which also oversees the CDC, first announced this 'dramatic restructuring' in March, saying that they would downsize from 82,000 to 62,000 full-time employees, claiming that it would 'save taxpayers $1.8 billion per year.' The department also revealed that it would be creating a new division called the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), which would be led by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 'We aren't just reducing bureaucratic sprawl. We are realigning the organization with its core mission and our new priorities in reversing the chronic disease epidemic,' Kennedy said. 'This Department will do more—a lot more—at a lower cost to the taxpayer,' he claimed. He reaffirmed this sentiment in an X post in March, noting that these cuts would help eliminate the current 'alphabet soup of departments.' 'We are streamlining HHS to make our agency more efficient and more effective. We will eliminate an entire alphabet soup of departments,' he said. As a result, around 10,000 employees were fired under the guidance of Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Yet Kennedy has already backtracked on these sweeping federal layoffs, admitting in April that too many cuts were made in the effort to 'Make America Healthy Again,' though he said that 'was always the plan.' 'We're streamlining the agencies. We're going to make it work for public health, make it work for the American people. In the course of that, there were a number of instances where studies that should have not have been cut were cut, and we've reinstated them,' Kennedy said. 'Personnel that should not have been cut were cut—we're reinstating them, and that was always the plan,' he stated.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kansas faces $3.77B in Medicaid cuts, thousands to lose coverage under Trump's bill: report
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Kansas will lose more than $3 billion in Medicaid funding, and thousands of Kansans will lose access to health insurance under Trump's proposed bill, according to a new report. New modeling shows 13,000 fewer Kansans would be able to enroll in Medicaid under the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' recently passed by the U.S. House, and the state would lose $3.77 billion in total Medicaid funding. Man charged in death of Platte County sports reporter shot on I-29 The modeling showed $2.29 billion in lost federal Medicaid funding alone—and $3.77 billion when combined with associated state funding losses over a 10-year period. Such losses would likely lead to higher uninsured rates and more financial struggles for rural hospitals already on the brink of closure. These results were recently released by Manatt Health, which conducted the analysis at the request of Kansas health philanthropies United Methodist Health Ministry Fund and REACH Healthcare Foundation. The two organizations wanted to better understand the financial and enrollment impacts of the bill, which would cut $700 billion from Medicaid and is awaiting a vote in the Senate. Medicaid, the public health insurance program that covers more than 366,000 Kansans, is funded jointly by the state and federal government. It provides low-income parents, children, seniors and people with disabilities with health insurance. Adults who do not have children do not qualify for Medicaid in Kansas. 'If this bill passes, it will cause long-lasting harm to thousands of families across Kansas and seriously threaten the survival of rural hospitals across the state,' said Brenda Sharpe, president and CEO at REACH Healthcare Foundation. The analysis shows Kansas will face significant coverage losses and funding reductions over the next 10 years. Manatt said the losses are even greater than shown in the analysis, as data limitations made it unable to model all the provisions in the bill. The estimates do not account for prohibitions on states setting up any new provider taxes or increasing assessments for other providers. That will cause Kansas health care providers, including nursing homes and other health providers, to lose critical funding over time and cause them to become even more financially vulnerable, Manatt said in a news release Wednesday. Coverage losses due to the bill's changes to the Affordable Care Act's Health Insurance Marketplace also couldn't be modeled. However, they will result in additional Kansans losing health insurance, according to Manatt. Not only will the bill remove people's health insurance, it also will remove food assistance. The bill includes $300 billion in cuts from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). 'Congress is trying to rush a plan through the process that will take health care and food assistance away from tens of thousands of Kansans, including children, seniors and people with disabilities,' said David Jordan, president and CEO at the Health Fund. 'At a time when hospitals are trying to keep their doors open and working families are struggling to keep a roof over their heads and food on their tables, we cannot afford these cuts.' Kansas already has more hospitals at risk of closure than any other state in the country. A recent report from the University of Kansas School of Nursing highlights the growing 'maternal care desert' in Kansas. Manatt said 63 rural hospitals are currently at risk, and 87% of Kansas rural hospitals are operating in the red. These hospitals struggle to survive with existing federal funding – and provisions in the bill would cause them to lose billions, making it even harder to stay open. When rural hospitals close, it removes job opportunities and access to health care, creating a ripple effect in small communities, Manatt said. You can read the full report below or by clicking here. Medicaid-Cut-Impacts-to-KansasDownload Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Analyst Kelly Shi from Jefferies Maintained a Buy Rating on Insmed Incorporated (INSM)
Insmed Incorporated (NASDAQ:INSM) is among the 13 Biotech Stocks with Huge Upside Potential. Kelly Shi of Jefferies has given Insmed Incorporated (NASDAQ:INSM) a buy recommendation, stating that she is confident in the TPIP treatment's impending Phase 2 data for pulmonary arterial hypertension. A biopharmaceutical research team taking notes in front of a laboratory's microscope. Shi anticipates a substantial decrease in pulmonary vascular resistance, the main outcome of the trial, of 20%, which is regarded as a definite success. If the results are encouraging, TPIP may replace Tyvaso, the current standard treatment. On June 4, Wells Fargo reaffirmed its Buy recommendation, with a price objective of $107. Shi points out that TPIP's once-daily dosage is a significant benefit over Tyvaso's four-times-daily schedule, which could increase adherence and make it more appealing to patients as well as physicians. The efficacy potential of TPIP is supported by interim study results that show additional advantages in six-minute walk distance (6MWD). Shi expects significant market penetration in light of these considerations, which could lead to an increase in Insmed Incorporated (NASDAQ:INSM)'s valuation. Both analysts highlight that if future trial results live up to predictions, TPIP has the potential to completely change the way that PAHs are treated. Insmed Incorporated (NASDAQ:INSM) is a biopharmaceutical firm that improves the lives of individuals suffering from serious and rare diseases. While we acknowledge the potential of INSM as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 10 High-Growth EV Stocks to Invest In and 13 Best Car Stocks to Buy in 2025. Disclosure. None. Sign in to access your portfolio
