logo
Abortion groups, doctors on 1-year anniversary of 6-week abortion ban declare: ‘We're still here'

Abortion groups, doctors on 1-year anniversary of 6-week abortion ban declare: ‘We're still here'

Yahoo01-05-2025
(Getty Images)
A year into Florida's ban on most abortions after six weeks' gestation, the network of groups and doctors providing access to pregnancy terminations hasn't vanished.
Still, the six-week ban led to a sharp decline in the number of abortions. By the state's count, there were 19,198 fewer abortions in 2024 than in 2023. Another estimate from the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health policy and research organization tracking medication abortions from pills shipped through the mail, places the decrease in abortions at 12,100.
As of March 31, the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration reported 8,682 abortions.
In interviews with the Florida Phoenix, representatives of Planned Parenthood this week stressed that its clinics are still providing people with access to health care services that run the gamut.
'We're still here. We're still going to be here. Planned Parenthood has always been around. I cannot imagine it not being around,' said Dr. Cherise Felix, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of South, East, and North Florida.
'We've expanded our service line. I think it's important for the community to know we do much more than abortion care. We do vasectomies, we do prenatal care, we do fertility care. We do menopausal care. It's not just abortions and STDs (sexually transmitted diseases). But I think the community is learning that. There's a large need for Planned Parenthood.'
The Florida Supreme Court last year upheld a 15-week abortion ban, which cleared the way for a more restrictive six-week ban Gov. Ron DeSantis signed into law in 2023 to take effect May 1, 2024, presuming the outcome of the court ruling.
The law bans abortions after six weeks' gestation, before many people know they're pregnant. There are exceptions for people who get pregnant as a result of rape, incest, or human trafficking. They can obtain abortions up to 15 weeks, but they must show a restraining order, police report, medical record, or court document showing that a crime is the reason they want to terminate the pregnancy.
Other exceptions to the state's six-week ban require two doctors to certify that the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to 'save the pregnant woman's life or avert a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.'
A single physician can approve the procedure if no other doctor is available. Abortions in the third trimester are legal if the fetus has a fatal abnormality. A proposed constitutional amendment to allow abortions up to the point of viability was approved by a majority of voters but didn't receive the necessary 60% approval to pass.
In the year since the restrictive six-week ban took effect, Felix said, more of her patients are requesting longer-acting reversible contraception (LARC) implants.
And some patients are asking for more permanent birth control, she said.
'Something I didn't expect is to see an increase in vasectomy patients — men that are seeking vasectomies because it's not safe anymore to not have really good contraception on board. And sometimes things fail, birth control pills fail, birth control sometimes fail,' she said. 'So we see a lot of men who are there who aren't really willing to leave it up to chance anymore and so they are starting to be a lot more involved in contraception as well.'
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida Chief Medical Officer Dr. Robyn Schickler says that since the six-week ban she's seen an uptick in patients with miscarriages diagnosed by other physicians who refer them to a Planned Parenthood center because 'they don't know if they can take care of them' under Florida law.
The clinic is seeing patients seeking exceptions to the six-week ban either because they were raped or are having maternal health complications or their fetus has a fetal abnormality, Schickler said.
Florida law defines a fatal fetal abnormality as a terminal condition that, in reasonable medical judgment, regardless of the provision of life-saving medical treatment, is incompatible with life outside the womb and will result in death upon birth or imminently thereafter. Two physicians must certify in writing that there is a fatal fetal abnormality in order to qualify for an exception to the six-week ban.
The definition is narrow and leaves pregnant people in a tough situation. Schickler said that it locks out some women with fetuses with genetic or chromosomal abnormalities.
'When it doesn't qualify, it's something really bad but, medically speaking, you can't give a definitive, 'Yes, of course the fetus will die, you know, in the uterus or right after birth.' There's some things you can't, you can't say for sure. And so it doesn't fit that narrow exception,' Schickler said.
Some of Schickler's patients aren't even aware of the six-week abortion ban and are shocked when they first present and are told they cannot obtain an abortion.
'I would say the most common is they just start crying like they can't believe it. Devastation,' Schickler said, describing their reactions. 'Sometimes we'll get someone, you know, asking if you can make an exception and just do this one, which of course we can't legally. Most of the time, though, it's just it's really sad like, you know, immediate crying, complete devastation.'
Planned Parenthood affiliates across Florida refer patients to their patient navigation program, which indentifies clinics in states where they can still obtain an abortion. Statewide, more than 3,000 Florida patients have used the system in the last year, according to Planned Parenthood.
Additional groups in Florida provide money for abortions in and out of the state, which entails paying for flights, hotels, and rideshares. This year alone, the Tampa Bay Abortion Fund has helped around 1,100 people end pregnancies, said Bree Wallace, the organization's director for case management. Most of the people the fund helps end up obtaining appointments in D.C. and Illinois.
'Now, people can go within a few days sometimes, so it's definitely more expensive,' Wallace said. 'Flights alone have been, like, $600 to $800, usually, and if someone wants to bring someone with them, that doubles.'
TBAF's logistical support to help people get to their appointments added up to $91,000 last year, according to its impact report.
'It's definitely been more expensive. I mean, every case is different, but you could definitely spend almost $2,000 alone on travel for someone going out of state,' Wallace said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Aside from the six-week ban, there are other restrictions in Florida's abortion laws. Only doctors are authorized to provide abortions and telehealth is banned, which means physicians must be in the room when women are administered abortion medication.
Florida has a 24-hour waiting period and a requirement that patients undergo a sonogram exam before obtaining an abortion. Minors must notify their parents and secure their approval but a judge can waive those requirements.
The Tampa fund helps minors connect with The Jane Network, which provides free legal services to get a judicial bypass.
While the rate of approval for a judicial bypasses remained steady since the six-week ban went into effect, the number of petitions declined by 43% from 2022 to 2024, according to annual reports from the Office of the State Courts Administrator.
Out of 130 petitions minors filed for a court's approval to seek an abortion last year, judges approved 123. Amanda Greenfield, founder and executive director of The Jane Network, said minors seek judicial bypass because their parents are abusive or they may be estranged and not living at home.
'Often a young person will reach out to us and, by the very next day, they will have an attorney and be able to go to court, and, hopefully, get that judicial bypass granted,' Greenfield said.
Since the six-week ban, minors have been contacting the pro bono group before they know they're pregnant, Greenfield said.
'We are seeing a lot of fear with young people. Young people contact us all the time, even before they know they're pregnant, because they think there's a chance that they're pregnant,' she said. 'If so, they wanna make sure they will be able to meet all the requirements before six weeks.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

First Amendment questions after FAMU limits online comments on Marva Johnson
First Amendment questions after FAMU limits online comments on Marva Johnson

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

First Amendment questions after FAMU limits online comments on Marva Johnson

Florida A&M University welcomed its new president Marva Johnson's first day Aug. 1 on all its social media pages, but responses were promptly silenced. Soon after the historically Black university posted a 5-minute video message from the new leader on its Facebook and Instagram pages, comments flooded in, many with scathing remarks from critics. But those comments were limited or now are gone, wiped from the internet by the school. To be sure, Johnson has been a lightning rod for criticism, seen by many in the FAMU community as a political ally put in place by Gov. Ron DeSantis as part of his program to take control of and remake the state's public higher education system under a conservative vision. The social media moves raise the question: Were the First Amendment rights of commenters violated? Finding an answer could be complicated, however, since public educational institutions are often treated differently than government agencies and officials. The Tallahassee Democrat, a member of the USA TODAY NETWORK – Florida, previously reported that about 300 comments on the Instagram post vanished, and users as of Aug. 12 still cannot comment on the post. It shows a photo of Johnson, with a caption encouraging users to watch her video message on YouTube, where comments are also turned off. Responses were also limited on the Facebook video, and the university commented: "Thank you for your feedback. Additional comments can be sent to FAMUFeedback@ Days later, though, users could comment again. Her presidential Facebook page also turned off comments on a video of her arriving on campus. The USA TODAY NETWORK – Florida emailed FAMU twice for comment and spoke on the phone with a spokesperson. When the reporter mentioned President Marva Johnson's video on social media, the spokesperson interrupted and said she had to get off the phone for a meeting, and asked the reporter to email her. The university did not respond to the follow-up email. To be clear, FAMU is not the only entity to grapple with the thorny issue of limiting comments. Particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, Leon County Schools began to limit comments during livestreamed meetings that became partisan battle grounds over mask mandates. That practice continues today. A school district spokesperson said administrators don't delete comments, though they will hide posts that use obscenities or are offensive. They also created a separate page for meetings, which comments have been disabled on from the beginning. Day 1: 'Let's get to work': FAMU President Marva Johnson vows to listen in inaugural remarks Higher education and the First Amendment The Supreme Court has held that restricting a constituent's ability to interact on a forum based on the constituent's views is unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and is prohibited, said Haley Gluhanich, senior program counsel for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. When asked whether FIRE knew of other universities with similar situations, Gluhanich said the organization does not track these cases. "When public universities and their administrators create forums for open discussion, the First Amendment restrains regulation of speech within that forum, including by blocking users and deleting comments," Gluhanich said. Because of its relative newness, how social media intertwines with the First Amendment is a work in progress. The First Amendment Coalition said on its website that it doesn't apply to private people or in a public official's private capacity, so it matters whether a social media account displays official actions by a public institution or figure. The attorney and former corporate lobbyist was a former board of education chair under Gov. Rick Scott and a member of DeSantis' transition team. Online forums and the First Amendment Deleting or limiting comments isn't the only issue in the social media realm of the First Amendment. It also involves being blocked by a public figure. South Florida provocateur Chaz Stevens sued state Rep. Chip LaMarca, R-Lighthouse Point, in April 2024 for blocking him on the X platform, saying LaMarca was violating his First Amendment rights. A plaintiff in a similar case from 2021 dropped a lawsuit against then-Rep. Chuck Clemons, R-Gainesville, after Clemons blocked him after asking the lawmaker to explain a 2018 vote. The Freedom Forum wrote in late June that being blocked on social media "affects your use of the freedoms of speech and petition." Yet for the First Amendment to apply, a person must be blocked from an official government account. It's unclear whether it applies when an account is run by a elected official as opposed to a government agency. On Aug. 1, the University of Wisconsin-Madison lost in federal appeals court after a former student sued in 2021, accusing the public university of violating First Amendment rights by removing Facebook and Instagram comments that criticized the university's animal research. The university restricted her account by preventing any of her comments from appearing publicly. The appellate judges found that the university's social media accounts were "limited public forums," meaning that the university could maintain relevant topics in the discussion but couldn't restrict viewpoints. (Additional context was added to this story after publication). This reporting content is supported by a partnership with Freedom Forum and Journalism Funding Partners. USA Today Network-Florida First Amendment reporter Stephany Matat is based in Tallahassee, Fla. She can be reached at SMatat@ On X: @stephanymatat. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: Free speech concerns as FAMU limits social media feedback over Johnson Solve the daily Crossword

Federal hearing over ‘Alligator Alcatraz' detainees' access to attorneys
Federal hearing over ‘Alligator Alcatraz' detainees' access to attorneys

CNN

time4 hours ago

  • CNN

Federal hearing over ‘Alligator Alcatraz' detainees' access to attorneys

Attorneys representing detainees held at the controversial makeshift immigration detention center dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz' are in federal court Monday seeking to allow detainees to meet with attorneys. The attorneys from groups including the ACLU, the US Immigration Law Counsel and Florida Keys Immigration filed a lawsuit against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and other officials in July, saying the defendants 'blocked detainees held at the facility from access to legal counsel' and are preventing 'people detained in civil immigration custody at Alligator Alcatraz from communicating with legal counsel and from filing motions with the immigration court that could result in their release from detention.' The lawsuit also aims to ensure there is updated information about the location of the detainees at 'Alligator Alcatraz.' 'The U.S. Constitution does not allow the government to simply lock people away without any ability to communicate with counsel or to petition the court for release from custody. The government may not trample on these most fundamental protections for people held in its custody,' Eunice Cho, senior counsel with the ACLU's National Prison Project and the lead attorney in the case, said in a news release. The Department of Homeland Security has denied the allegations, telling CNN in a statement Sunday the 'facility maintains a physical space for attorneys to meet with their clients,' and that attorneys may also request to speak with detainees they represent via email. At a hearing last month, attorneys for the ACLU urged the judge to move forward with the lawsuit as quickly as possible, alleging that staff at the detention center were pushing the detainees to self-deport without access to counsel. The ACLU also reminded the court that 'removal flights' from the facility had already taken place. 'The government has banned in-person legal visitation, any confidential phone or video communication, and confidential exchange of written documents,' the ACLU said in the news release about the lawsuit, describing several instances of attorneys turned away after attempting to meet with their clients. Monday's hearing in Miami, Florida, is the latest in the case against the federal and state officials whose attorneys have argued the lawsuits were not filed in the correct federal court district. US District Judge Rodolfo Ruiz II, who was nominated by President Donald Trump, appeared skeptical of those arguments. The judge also said there was 'confusion' about who runs the detention camp. 'Alligator Alcatraz' is purportedly run by the state of Florida under a partnership with local agencies and the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement under a federal program known as the 287(g) program. Deep in the marshy wetlands of the Florida Everglades, 'Alligator Alcatraz' has been mired with controversy since the start, with reports of hundreds of migrants confined in cages amid sweltering heat, bug infestations and meager meals. 'What is happening at the facility is anomalous for many reasons, not only the way that it was built and where it's been built, the legal authority and the confusion about who is running the detention facility and whose custody people are in,' Cho told CNN. 'These are all things that have never really been seen at other detention facilities.' The state of Florida has pushed back, saying conditions at the camp are in 'good working order' and that claims to the contrary are false. Cho explained the goal of their case is make sure 'basic constitutional rights' of detainees are being upheld, including the 'basic right to be able to speak to their lawyers and the basic right to be able to petition the government for release from custody.' Other alleged violations of constitutional rights include officers 'pressuring detainees to sign voluntary removal orders without the opportunity to speak to counsel,' said Cho, and a detainee who was deported after their bond hearing was canceled because immigration courts said they don't have jurisdiction over people who are held in 'Alligator Alcatraz.' 'These are fundamental constitutional rights, and the fact that it's been happening for such a long time has had a huge impact on the people who are being held at this facility,' Cho said. 'Alligator Alcatraz cannot end up being a black hole where people disappear.' The hastily built detention center is about an hour's drive west of Miami. The temporary camp is built on an airstrip and made up of repurposed FEMA trailers and tents, surrounded by a fence. This lawsuit against the facility is one of two working its way through the federal court system – the other was filed by environmentalists suing to stop the facility's operations due to its close location to the marshlands that serve as a crucial source of freshwater and drinking water for South Florida. On Thursday, DeSantis announced a new immigrant detention center called 'Deportation Depot' in northern Florida. The facility will likely be ready in about two to three weeks, Florida Division of Emergency Management Director Kevin Guthrie said, and it is expected to house around 1,300 detainees. CNN's Rafael Romo and Maxime Tamsett contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store