New Hampshire is debating legalized assisted suicide. Here's how it's worked out elsewhere.
Lindsey Warren, of Coventry, Vermont, has helped many people end their lives using medical aid-in-dying drugs.
'I've seen so many people happy and relieved that they have choice and dignity in the end of their life,' she said. 'Everyone that I've worked with has been overjoyed that they made it to the day. They're able to choose. They're able to say their goodbyes to their family. And they've been fighting the good fight, but they are really ready to rest and not be in pain and suffering anymore.'
Warren is an end-of-life doula. Her job is to help people navigate different aspects of end-of-life care including medical aid-in-dying, also known as assisted suicide (though she, and other proponents, prefer the term medical aid-in-dying), which is legal in Vermont. This includes guiding them through the eligibility and approval process required of patients for them to receive medical aid-in-dying drugs as well as helping with doctors appointments. She said having the practice legalized is 'absolutely a positive' for Vermont.
'Every step along the way, it's always their choice,' she said. 'And they may decide to, in the end, not ingest (the aid-in-dying drugs) but at least they knew they had that choice and they explored that.'
Warren said she hasn't seen a lot of the common criticisms of assisted suicide – people with disabilities being pressured into it, people with depression and suicidal ideation abusing it – come to fruition, but she has seen long wait times, especially as people from other states come to receive the drugs. She hopes other states, like New Hampshire, will legalize the practice to take pressure off Vermont's system.
And many in New Hampshire share that hope. New Hampshire could soon become the 11th U.S. state to legalize assisted suicide as lawmakers debate the so-called New Hampshire End of Life Freedom Act.
IF YOU OR SOMEONE YOU KNOW is in a crisis, call, text or chat the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline at 988. To reach the New Hampshire Rapid Response Access Point, call or text 833-710-6477. If you need help with grief and loss, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention offers advice and resources. You can also call the National SAMHSA Helpline, 1-800-662-HELP, with services in English and Spanish, toll free 24/7.
If passed, House Bill 254 would allow adults who have been determined by two doctors to have an estimated six months left to live or are in Medicare-certified hospice care to end their life through aid-in-dying drugs in New Hampshire. The patient receiving the drug must have the mental capacity to understand their options and decision, must be able to self-administer the medication, and must give informed consent. The provider is also required to confirm the patient isn't being coerced.
At a hearing in the State House last month, Rep. Bob Lynn, the Windham Republican who introduced the bill, said it was about 'giving people at the end of their life the freedom to end their life in a dignified way rather than endure continuous suffering.'
At the hearing, advocates said the bill allows people already near death to end their life on their own terms and avoid the suffering they may face in the lead-up to their death. Opponents argued the bill has a number of flaws, including that it would encourage medical providers to give up on treating people facing severe disabilities or other conditions in favor of ending their lives or that it would be abused by people suffering from depression and suicidal ideation.
Gov. Kelly Ayotte said last week she hadn't yet looked at the bill and declined to provide her stance.
'It is a very important issue, and I know that it's an issue that people on both sides of it have deep concerns about,' she added.
If the bill becomes law, New Hampshire would be far from the first state or country to legalize assisted suicide. Between criticisms of the practice being used to euthanize the poor and disabled in Canada and disapproval from the American Medical Association to popularity across the U.S. and a surge of travel to Switzerland, the practice has seen a mixed reception.
Assisted suicide is legal on both New Hampshire's west and east borders, in Vermont and Maine.
In 2013, Vermont became the fourth U.S. state to legalize assisted suicide. Act 39, also known as the Vermont Patient Choice and Control at End of Life law, allows terminally ill patients with a prognosis of six months left to live to receive medical aid in dying in Vermont. The medical aid in dying drugs have to be self-administered, and the patient must be deemed capable of making their own health care decisions and giving informed consent. Vermont's law is very similar to New Hampshire's proposal.
From 2013, when the bill was passed, through June 2023, the most recent data available, 203 people ended their lives through this act, according to the Vermont Department of Health. Eighty-five of those occurred from July 1, 2021, to June 30, 2023. The most common diagnosis cited by patients ending their life was cancer, with 153 cases, or 75%; 26, or 13%, were due to neurodegenerative conditions while 6, or 3%, were end-stage lung diseases like COPD or emphysema.
In 2019, Maine joined Vermont in legalizing assisted suicide through the Maine Death with Dignity Act. The law allows for assisted suicide in patients with an incurable terminal illness that is expected to kill them within six months. Maine's law also requires the patient to be able to self-administer the drug and be of sound mind. In Maine, the patient must be a legal resident of the state, which is not the case in Vermont (though it was prior to May 2023) and New Hampshire's proposal.
In 2023, 80 patients began the process in Maine to receive aid-in-dying drugs, according to the Maine Department of Health and Human Services, though four died before completing the process and nine were still alive at the time of the department's report. From 2019 to 2022, 117 people have been prescribed and taken this life-ending drug in Maine. As in Vermont, cancer is the most common diagnosis for these patients in 2023, representing 42 of them, or 53%. Six of them were diagnosed with ALS and five had heart disease or a cardiac condition.
Including Vermont and Maine, there are 10 U.S. states plus Washington, D.C., where the practice is legal. The others are Oregon, Washington, Montana, California, Colorado, Hawaii, New Jersey, and New Mexico.
In Montana, assisted suicide is legal only through a common law legal precedent established by the Supreme Court case Baxter v. Montana in 2009. All other states legalized it through legislation.
In total, 22% of Americans live somewhere with legal assisted suicide. And it's popular across the country, with 71% of respondents in an August Gallup poll saying they believe doctors should be 'allowed by law to end the patient's life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it.'
However, some physicians in the U.S. aren't as supportive. The American Medical Association says that the practice violates its code of ethics.
'Physician-assisted suicide is fundamentally incompatible with the physician's role as healer, would be difficult or impossible to control and would pose serious societal risks,' the association wrote.
Quebec became the first Canadian province to legalize assisted suicide in 2014. Since then, however, the Canadian Supreme Court has ruled it legal for all Canadians.
After multiple expansions, Canadian law includes some of the world's most permissive policies on assisted suicide. Since 2021, a patient does not have to be terminally ill to receive the drugs in Canada, but rather may be experiencing a long and complicated condition – including disability alone – that impacts their quality of life. The law there also allows a provider to directly administer the drugs rather than require the patient self-administer. (When a provider administers the drug, it's called euthanasia.) Some opponents have called these expansions part of a so-called slippery slope.
The practice has exploded there. Assisted dying now represents roughly 1 in 20 Canadian deaths, according to an annual report released in December by Health Canada with data from 2023, the most recent available. That's 15,300 deaths, or 4.7% of deaths in the country. Most – roughly 96% – had a terminal illness, but a small minority – around 4% – fit into the category of illness with a natural death not 'reasonably foreseeable.' The median age was 77.7.
In recent years, Canada's assisted-suicide policies have garnered criticism for disproportionately being used by the poor and disabled.
An Associated Press investigation in October found that the highest numbers of assisted deaths for patients not facing terminal illness came from the poorest areas. The AP also found medical providers expressing deep discomfort carrying out some of their assisted-dying requests, some of which were avoidable deaths. Additionally, the investigation told the story of someone who was euthanized even after their doctor concluded their suffering was mostly because they were homeless, in debt, and unwilling to accept long-term care, as well as someone who specifically told their doctor that the government's small amount of disability support for their ankle and back injury left them no choice but to request medical aid-in-dying, among others. However, the AP concluded poverty doesn't seem disproportionately prominent among recipients with terminal diseases, which would be the only recipients allowed in New Hampshire under its proposal.
A Spectator thought piece entitled 'Why is Canada euthanizing the poor?' and an article from The Guardian, 'Are Canadians being driven to assisted suicide by poverty or healthcare crisis?', both from 2022, delved into the same concerns.
In 2020, Roger Foley, a man with a neurodegenerative disease, testified to the Canadian Parliament that medical providers attempted to coerce him into assisted suicide by threatening high rates for the care he needed or to forcibly discharge him.
'Assisted dying is easier to access than safe and appropriate disability supports to live,' Foley said.
Assisted suicide is legal in Australia, Austria, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain, and Switzerland, among others.
In 1941, Switzerland was the first country in the world to legalize assisted suicide, though euthanasia – having a provider administer the aid-in-dying drugs – is illegal there. While critics deem it 'suicide tourism,' the country permits foreigners to travel there for assisted suicide. This has been praised by participants' friends and families who say it gives them a good option to end their lives on their own terms.
In New Hampshire, the friend of one such person, Hope Damon, who is also a member of the state House of Representatives, told lawmakers the story last month of her friend Michael, who traveled to Switzerland to die.
'We sadly and joyfully celebrated the loss and that he was able to choose to end his life on the terms that were right for him and save his family from watching a heart-wrenchingly sad decline,' she said, urging lawmakers to legalize assisted suicide.
The Netherlands and Belgium have gone so far as to legalize assisted dying for children.
A study from a group of Belgian researchers found that almost all participants they examined wanted their family member with cancer's medical aid-in-dying request to be granted, and some of them even took an active supportive role in the process. A study from researchers in the Netherlands, while older – from 2003 – also examined the impact of the practice on family members, showing that friends and family of cancer patients who died through euthanasia displayed less traumatic grief symptoms, felt less grief in the moment, and had less post-traumatic stress reactions than friends and family of patients who died of natural causes.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Warren Buffett Bought UnitedHealth Stock. Should You Do the Same?
Key Points UnitedHealth Group stock has been rallying on news that Berkshire Hathaway has invested in the business. Warren Buffett is the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the investment could be seen as a possible vote of confidence in UnitedHealth's business. The health insurer has been facing multiple headwinds this year and a turnaround may not happen quick for the stock. 10 stocks we like better than UnitedHealth Group › Shares of health insurer UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH) received a boost last week after investors learned that Warren Buffett's company, Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A)(NYSE: BRK.B), has invested in it. It has been a tumultuous year for UnitedHealth, which has seen its shares hit multi-year lows due to underwhelming quarterly results and a barrage of bad news. Entering trading this week, UnitedHealth stock is still down 40% since the start of the year. However, the news of Berkshire buying shares of UnitedHealth may entice many other investors to follow suit. Could now be a good time to invest in the healthcare company? Why Berkshire's decision to invest in UnitedHealth isn't a big surprise Back in June, I wrote an article explaining why Buffett might end up buying UnitedHealth Group. The insurance company is right within the billionaire investor's circle of competence and its strong position in the healthcare industry makes it the type of predictable, long-term investment that Buffett normally seeks. And especially with UnitedHealth stock in the midst of a sell-off this year, that may have simply sweetened the deal for Buffett, as it would have given him an excellent margin of safety. According to Berkshire's most recent filing, which is as of June 30, it has bought approximately 5 million shares of UnitedHealth Group. It's a notable position for Berkshire, but it's not a huge one -- UnitedHealth accounts for just 0.5% of its total portfolio. The company still faces a tough road ahead The investment in UnitedHealth Group may appear to investors as a vote of confidence from Buffett in the struggling business, at a time when it desperately needs some positive news. Up until recently, it's just been a flurry of negative press. Earlier this year, UnitedHealth's CEO Andrew Witty stepped down for personal reasons, and Stephen Hemsley, who once led the business, has taken over again. There have been reports of the Department of Justice looking into the health insurer's billing practices related to Medicare. And on top of it all, the company's earnings have fallen well short of analyst expectations this year due to rising expenses. At a time when healthcare reform is on the radar for the government in an effort to reduce spending, there's simply no end to the question marks around UnitedHealth. And there's certainly no quick fix for the stock. There are, however, reasons investors may still want to buy shares of UnitedHealth today. Currently, it's yielding around 3%, which is a rarity for the stock; it's typically a low-yielding dividend. And UnitedHealth is still profitable and over the trailing 12 months it has averaged a profit margin of just over 5%. While it has been rallying recently, it's still trading at a fairly low value, as its price-to-earnings ratio is just 13. UnitedHealth's business isn't necessarily broken, but it is facing some uncertainty in the near term. And investors haven't appeared to be willing to hold on amid all these question marks. Berkshire taking a stake in the business may have changed those attitudes, at least for the time being, anyway. The question is, whether that will remain the case if in another quarter or two, UnitedHealth still shows that it isn't out of the woods and that a turnaround isn't imminent. UnitedHealth can be a good buy, but investors shouldn't expect a quick fix Investors should always consider doing their own analysis before buying a stock. Following someone else's moves can be a dangerous strategy. Buffett's reasons for investing in a company may differ from the reasons you may want to invest in it. I do believe UnitedHealth's stock will recover and that it can be a good investment in the long term, but I also don't think it'll be a quick fix for the company to reduce costs and win back risk-averse investors. And while Berkshire investing in the company has sparked some enthusiasm behind UnitedHealth stock, that itself is not a reason to invest. It certainly doesn't mean that the stock is destined to continue rising in the near term. UnitedHealth is a stock that's going to be suitable primarily for long-term investors. It may take a while before the business is able to prove that it's on the right track and a safe buy again. If you're willing to be patient, then it may be worth adding the stock to your portfolio. But don't simply invest in UnitedHealth because Buffett did. Should you invest $1,000 in UnitedHealth Group right now? Before you buy stock in UnitedHealth Group, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and UnitedHealth Group wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $671,466!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,115,633!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,077% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 185% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 18, 2025 David Jagielski has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Berkshire Hathaway. The Motley Fool recommends UnitedHealth Group. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Warren Buffett Bought UnitedHealth Stock. Should You Do the Same? was originally published by The Motley Fool


Business Wire
3 hours ago
- Business Wire
Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota to Join Cambia Health Solutions as Newest Affiliated Single-State Blue Plan
PORTLAND, Ore. & FARGO, N.D.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Cambia Health Solutions (Cambia) and Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota (BCBSND) today announced a strategic affiliation to better serve members with access to care that's simpler and more affordable — and remains close to home. The affiliation will unify all operations and enable the organizations to share best practices for local plan innovation and services, deliver personalized member experiences and leverage Cambia's robust technology infrastructure. Strategic affiliation to better serve members with access to care that's simpler and more affordable — and remains close to home. Share Established in 1995 by four Blue Cross Blue Shield licensees, Cambia is a nonprofit health solutions company that provides management and shared services for local Blue plans across the Pacific Northwest and Mountain West, all connected by a common focus on delivering more for members. 'Affiliating with Cambia allows us to leap ahead in the capabilities we can bring to the North Dakotans we serve,' said Dan Conrad, president and CEO of BCBSND. 'We both have a deep commitment to a strong local presence today and into the future. Backed by Cambia's national scale and resources, we can offer members and customers more affordable plan solutions and personalized health tools, all while continuing to be supported by local employees who understand their health care needs.' Cambia and BCBSND share a legacy of practical innovation and community commitment. Cambia's mission is to transform health care to work better for real people and be economically sustainable. It is a founding partner and investor in Echo Health Ventures, which seeks to invest in and grow great health care companies. The health solutions company brings experience offering high-quality, cost-effective health care through personalized member tools that make it easier for people to navigate their care. BCBSND contributes deep expertise and market leadership in rural health, Medicare and Medicaid solutions, and provider collaboration. 'Cambia works every day to make health care easier and lives better for our members. For decades we've proven that we can do more when we have partners who share in this work,' said Jared Short, president and CEO of Cambia. 'BCBSND's culture and vision fit perfectly as we work together to innovate and transform health care for the communities we serve.' Members retain their current coverage and will continue to use their BCBSND insurance card just as they do today. BCBSND will continue to offer Medicare Advantage through NextBlue of North Dakota. BCBSND will maintain its local plan name, board of directors, and philanthropic foundation. It will also continue its mutual status, meaning it will remain governed by voting policyholders rather than investors. All BCBSND's reserve funds and foundation resources remain in North Dakota. Cambia will also maintain its foundation, and local health plans will operate in Idaho, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, as they do now. The areas of focus for the affiliation include: Improving the care experience with more personalized and connected solutions for members and providers. The affiliation enables investment in care solutions such as advanced primary care, mobile platforms for on-demand and virtual primary care, expanded tools for maternal and family health, and programs tailored to local communities. The affiliation enables investment in care solutions such as advanced primary care, mobile platforms for on-demand and virtual primary care, expanded tools for maternal and family health, and programs tailored to local communities. Expanding capabilities and tools to meet the unique local health needs of members and communities. Shared technology and data will create new opportunities for plans to collaborate with providers, employers and communities to support care that is more accessible, understandable and actionable for members and providers. Shared technology and data will create new opportunities for plans to collaborate with providers, employers and communities to support care that is more accessible, understandable and actionable for members and providers. Investing in transformative, financially sound solutions to improve members' health outcomes. Combined resources across operations and technology will increase agility, expand plan capabilities, provide cost savings, and simplify the experience for members and customers. The strategic affiliation is subject to regulatory approval in North Dakota and is expected to close in 2026. For more information, visit the fact sheet. About Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota BCBSND was founded in 1940 with the mission to provide members with affordable access to health care across the state. As an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association (BCBSA), BCBSND is committed to transforming care and health across the state to improve outcomes, lower cost trends and make it easier to shop, buy and use health care coverage. Members have access to unmatched local service and to a comprehensive network of health care providers across the state, the nation and more than 190 countries. About Cambia Health Solutions Cambia Health Solutions, headquartered in Portland, Oregon, is dedicated to transforming health care. We put people at the heart of everything we do as we work to make the health care system more economically sustainable and efficient for people and their families. Our company reaches millions of Americans nationwide, including more than 3.6 million people served by our regional health plans. To learn more about us, visit


Politico
5 hours ago
- Politico
Lawmakers offload UnitedHealth stock
With help from Carmen Paun PROGRAMMING NOTE: Pulse will be on hiatus from Aug. 25 through Sept. 1. We'll be back to our normal schedule on Tuesday, Sept. 2. Driving the Day STOCK ACTIVITY — Some Washington policymakers with financial stakes in UnitedHealth Group are selling their stocks in the company as it struggles financially and the Trump administration investigates its billing practices, Kelly reports. Lawmakers of both parties have sold off UnitedHealth stock worth as much as $1.2 million, against $950,000 in purchases this year, according to a POLITICO review of stock trading. An uptick in sales in recent months comes as Congress and the Trump administration probe the health care behemoth over billing practices and how often it denies care. Why it matters: Congress members' stock sales are legal even though some of them sit on committees that oversee the insurance industry. The sales come amid an effort in Congress to ban members from trading stocks to prevent conflicts of interest — which some lawmakers have said they support and cite as justification for their decisions to sell. Dan Weiskopf, an investment portfolio manager at Tidal Financial Group who tracks congressional stock trading, said if he were an investor in the insurer, he'd 'be very concerned when I saw that the regulators, as members of Congress, are dumping the stock. That's very clearly a red flag.' Background: Bipartisan lawmakers in Congress have signaled interest in cracking down on overpayments to the privately run Medicare Advantage program, in which UnitedHealth Group has a large stake, and probing excessive care-denial claims. Additionally, the Department of Justice is investigating the company's Medicare billing practices. The Wall Street Journal first reported a civil DOJ investigation in February, and in the week following, Democratic California Reps. Ro Khanna and Gil Cisneros and Republican Indiana Rep. Jefferson Shreve collectively sold up to $150,000 in UnitedHealth Group stock. All of Khanna's UnitedHealth stock is in trusts belonging to his children and spouse. A spokesperson for Shreve said the representative has not traded personally-held stocks as a member of Congress, and that he recently directed the assets manager of his charitable trust to divest from individual stocks. Cisneros' spokesperson said his stock trades are managed by outside financial advisers. 'I don't trade any stocks and have pushed for a ban on stock trading, leading the effort to pass the TRUST in Congress Act,' said Khanna, a member of the Oversight and Accountability Committee, the House's main investigative arm, in a statement. That bill would require members of Congress to place their assets in blind trusts. Rep. David Taylor (R-Ohio) sold up to $65,000 in company shares on the same day in May that The Wall Street Journal reported the DOJ had launched a criminal probe into the company's Medicare billing practices. The next day, Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) sold shares worth up to $45,000 — some of it owned by his children. Rep. Robert Bresnahan (R-Pa.) sold stock worth as much as $50,000. Taylor, Moskowitz and Bresnahan did not respond to requests for comment. Even so: Some lawmakers who sold their UnitedHealth Group stocks this year said they are divesting all of their shares in support of the congressional push to remove conflicts of interest. That includes freshman Rep. Julie Johnson (D-Texas) and Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio), according to their spokespeople. Johnson sold UnitedHealth stock worth up to $30,000 between April and July, and Landsman reported selling stock — owned by his spouse — worth up to $50,000 in March. WELCOME TO THURSDAY PULSE. High levels of exposure to technology can be cognitively harmful to children and teens, data has shown, but researchers are finding that the opposite is true for older adults. Send your tips, scoops and feedback to khooper@ and sgardner@ and follow along @kelhoops and @sophie_gardnerj. At the Agencies HUNDREDS OF CDC WORKERS LET GO — About 600 CDC employees are receiving permanent termination notices after a court ruling last week paved the way for the agency to move forward with some firings, according to the union representing agency workers. The cuts are across the Division of Violence Prevention, Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, the Freedom of Information Act office, the Office of Financial Resources and the offices of the chief information and chief operating officers, said a spokesperson for the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents more than 2,000 dues-paying members at the CDC. HHS referred POLITICO to a March announcement on agency restructuring. Background: A U.S. district court judge agreed last week to narrow an injunction that had been blocking the Trump administration's plan to fire hundreds of CDC employees. The injunction had initially blocked HHS from terminating any CDC employees, but the revised order blocks only six of the agency's centers from the reduction in force. The centers still blocked from terminations include the CDC's National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD and Tuberculosis Prevention; the Division of Reproductive Health; the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; the Office on Smoking and Health; the National Center for Environmental Health; and the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities. Key context: The terminations come as CDC employees are dealing with the impact of a shooting earlier this month that targeted the agency's headquarters in Atlanta. Eye on Insurers EMPLOYERS WORRY ABOUT COSTS — Most small and mid-sized businesses offering their workers group health insurance are concerned they won't be able to afford the benefit within three years, according to a new survey from health insurance marketplace eHealth. The findings come as employer health costs are projected to jump 9 percent next year, the highest increase since at least 2017, according to a Business Group on Health survey published earlier this week. The spike comes as more Americans seek out medical care and are prescribed costly medications, like weight-loss drugs. Most Americans under 65 — more than 160 million people — are enrolled in health insurance through their employers. eHealth's findings: Nearly 90 percent of the businesses surveyed said they're concerned health benefits will be too costly to provide to employees within three years. Three-quarters of the respondents said they'd be in favor of switching to a health benefits model called an Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangement, or ICHRA, which allows employers to offer their workers a tax credit to purchase health insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchange in lieu of a group plan. But more than half of the respondents said they're unfamiliar or uneducated on the policy. Background: The arrangements — a Trump first-term policy — have gained some traction recently, as employers grapple with the high costs and administrative burden that come with offering traditional group plans. But changes to the ACA enacted in the Republicans' megabill, the expiration of enhanced federal Obamacare subsidies at year's end and a new Trump administration marketplace rule could lead to fewer young and healthy people enrolled in the ACA market and higher premiums — making offering ICHRAs less attractive for employers, policy experts recently told POLITICO. Key context: The national survey was conducted in July among 503 owners and managers of small to mid-sized businesses — those with 500 employees or fewer. Global Health NOT OUT OF THE MEASLES WOODS — The Texas measles outbreak might be over, but the U.S. measles-free status is still at risk, according to the Pan-American Health Organization, the regional arm of the World Health Organization, Carmen reports. Other states have reported cases linked to the Texas outbreak, a PAHO spokesperson said, pointing to New Mexico as an example. The Idaho health department reported a third confirmed measles case Wednesday, in an unvaccinated child. 'To maintain measles elimination status, a country must have controlled and ended all outbreaks related to the first case identified (in this case, in Texas) within twelve months,' the PAHO spokesperson said via email. Names in the News Accountable for Health, an advocacy organization committed to accelerating the adoption of effective value-based care, is adding Patrick McConnell as director of federal affairs. McConnell, an alumnus of former Rep. Max Rose (D-N.Y.), previously was director at Rational 360 and graduated from Hamilton College. WHAT WE'RE READING POLITICO's Tyler Katzenberger reports on California policy influencers supporting harsher social media laws than the state's voters. KFF Health News' Fred Clasen-Kelly and Renuka Rayasam report on the toll of the nation's gun violence epidemic.