logo
Many new moms in Texas don't know they qualify for a year of Medicaid, doctors say

Many new moms in Texas don't know they qualify for a year of Medicaid, doctors say

Yahoo30-01-2025

Almost all of the pregnant women Dr. Joshua Splinter sees at his rural East Texas practice are on Medicaid. For years, he would treat these patients during pregnancy, deliver their babies and then start the mad dash to squeeze in a follow-up visit before they lost insurance just eight weeks after giving birth.
This just didn't work for him or his patients. He'd get someone on a treatment plan for a chronic condition, but then the hormone and weight changes after childbirth would require different interventions. He'd see early signs of postpartum depression or partner violence, and then lose contact with the patient once she lost insurance.
'These aren't things where I start a medication and we're done,' he said. 'This requires close follow-up with continued treatment and non-medical intervention, and we can't get that done in two months.'
So when the Texas Legislature voted to extend postpartum Medicaid to a full year in 2023, Splinter was ecstatic. This was going to be a 'game changer' for his patients, he said.
But almost two years later, many of his patients and those like them across the state are still struggling to get the full range of health care they were promised. It took almost a year for the extended coverage to go into effect, leaving many of his patients in limbo, and even now, they're still often falling through the cracks in Texas' health care system.
The number of pregnant and postpartum Texans enrolled in Medicaid has almost doubled since before the pandemic, to more than 265,000. But many patients are unaware that they are still covered for an additional 10 months, according to a survey from Texans Care for Children, a health advocacy group. New moms report being unable to access the physical and mental health services covered by Medicaid, and doctors say changes are needed to ensure the workforce, reimbursement rates and coverage can keep up with a full year of need.
As the Legislature returns, Diana Forester, health policy director with Texans Care for Children, said there's still much work to be done, such as increasing provider awareness and patient access, to ensure new moms are fully benefiting from this extended coverage.
'You can't just turn on this extended coverage and expect that to be the end,' Forester said. 'We as a state need to figure out what postpartum care looks like in Texas … Our leaders have an opportunity to make that work better for families, but it's not there yet.'
When Gov. Greg Abbott signed House Bill 12 into law in May 2023, Texas became the 41st state to extend postpartum Medicaid to 12 months. It was a victory years in the making, after several sessions of advocacy from health care providers, maternal health experts and moms themselves.
The state almost passed it in 2021, after the federal COVID relief package eased the way for states to get this extended coverage approved, but the Legislature instead passed a six-month extension that the federal government deemed 'not approvable.'
But when the Legislature returned in 2023, Roe v. Wade had been overturned, abortion was virtually banned in Texas, and there was new momentum around bills to support pregnant women and families.
Sen. Lois Kolkhorst, a Republican from Brenham, carried the bill on the Senate side, and said at a hearing that extending coverage was about making sure 'women who give birth to children in this pro-life environment are cared for … You cannot raise a child without being healthy.'
The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, and Abbott signed it into law in May 2023. HHSC submitted the waiver request to the federal government, which approved it last January. The state began offering extended coverage March 1, 2024.
After all that back and forth, half-steps and setbacks, many doctors were unaware that the extended coverage was actually in effect, Texans Care for Children found in its survey. Some doctors found out for the first time through their billing departments. Several said they wanted more outreach from the state health agency and the managed care organizations, like a flyer or training for doctors.
'The state could do a lot more in that area,' said Helen Kent Davis, a senior policy advisor to the Texas Academy of Family Physicians. 'They've tried, to the extent that there's funding for outreach, to get the word out, but there's more to be done, for sure.'
In a statement, a spokesperson for Texas' Health and Human Services Commission said they used a variety of approaches to inform the public about these changes, including calls and webinars, provider notices, posting information to their websites and working with managed care organizations to get the word out.
But knowledge gaps remain, Kent Davis said. As an example, she said pediatricians have not been educated on this change the way OB/GYNs and family physicians have. Since they're seeing the baby regularly, these doctors could be a key ally in making sure the mom knows she still has coverage.
Doctors also report confusion about who is responsible for overseeing this year of health care. Texas Medicaid changed its policy to allow an OB/GYN to serve as a patient's doctor for the whole year, but the survey found many doctors across specialties were not aware of that and, when asked, said they would prefer patients be handed off to a primary care provider.
'Patients have been seeing their obstetrician this whole time and the health care system is not good at handing them back to a primary care physician for the rest of that period,' Kent Davis said. 'This is a significant culture shift for patients and providers.'
And with a shortage of primary care physicians, especially in rural areas, more coverage doesn't automatically translate into more health care. One new mother in Mineral Wells told Texans Care for Children she would have to travel almost an hour to Fort Worth to see a primary care provider.
'Every day, I get really bad headaches… very bad headaches,' she said. 'And it's getting more consistent. I just deal with it.'
In a state where almost half of all pregnant women typically lost insurance two months after giving birth, convincing new moms that they can continue engaging with the health care system has been an uphill battle. Home-visiting nurses, community health workers and others who work closely with new moms report significant confusion and resistance from patients.
'They really had to talk their patients into accessing care, essentially, because they're so used to not having coverage and so worried about the cost and having to absorb that personally,' Forester said.
It didn't help matters that this extended coverage finally went into effect amid a historic fracture to the state's Medicaid system. For three years during the pandemic, states kept everyone enrolled in Medicaid, but in spring 2023, were allowed to move people off their rolls.
Texas removed more people, including postpartum women, faster than any other state, against federal guidelines, The Texas Tribune and ProPublica found. The state required almost everyone to resubmit documents proving their eligibility, rather than relying on automatic approvals like other states. More than a million people lost coverage for bureaucratic reasons like failing to return a form. The state has acknowledged some errors, which they later fixed.
Amid this upheaval, Texas implemented the extended coverage, including reinstating women who lost Medicaid at two months but were still in their one-year postpartum period.
'It was really confusing for members who were like, 'you terminated my Medicaid a month ago, I have the notice,' and then they're told that it's being turned back on for a few more months,' Forester said. 'And it's really hard for a doctor to be able to educate their patients when it's totally dependent on where they are in the postpartum period.'
Splinter said he's had at least a dozen patients over the last year who had to call their managed care organization to get their coverage reinstated.
'I'm having to act a little like a social worker and educate the patient on who they need to call and what they need to say,' he said. As a family physician trained in high-risk pregnancies practicing in an underserved area, Splinter said, 'there's only so much of me to go around, especially if I have to spend more time on non-doctor work like this.'
A spokesperson for the state's health agency said everyone who was enrolled in Medicaid or CHIP during their pregnancy were automatically reinstated for the remainder of their postpartum period. While some of this is naturally sorting itself out the longer the policy is in effect, Splinter said he was surprised at the work his patients had to do to get the coverage they qualified for.
'You're leaving pregnant patients and new moms to fight up the chain and solve it themselves from the bottom' he said. 'That just isn't the right way to be doing this.'
As more new moms are able to take advantage of this extended coverage, doctors and advocates hope the health care system is able to meet their needs. In the short term, Splinter said, he's hopeful that the state can proactively go back through its records and ensure women who qualify for this coverage are actually getting it.
In the long term, the state needs to address long-standing structural problems facing its health care system, like significant shortages in primary care and mental health providers. Advocates are pushing for increased reimbursement rates and reforms to the bureaucracy that providers must go through to accept Medicaid, to ensure doctors are willing to see these patients.
They also want Medicaid coverage to catch up to the extended time period women can receive these benefits.
For example, Texas Medicaid covers one postpartum depression screening, even though national groups recommend at least four, Kent Davis said. With an extra ten months of coverage, that's a lot more touch points for doctors to be screening patients for mental health needs. She'd also like to see Medicaid cover lactation support among other needs that can emerge in the first 12 months postpartum.
'It takes a comprehensive strategy,' Kent Davis said. 'Obviously the coverage issue was one part to address and, and we're so happy that we were able to pass House Bill 12. But now that we have this coverage, what do we do to make sure women can get it?'
Disclosure: Texans Care for Children has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies
History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies

U.S. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attend an event in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit - Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images On May 11, 2023, President Joseph Biden ended the COVID-19 public health emergency, calling an finish to the pandemic. By the end of 2023, COVID-19 claimed the lives of over 20 million people around the world. But through international cooperation and evidence-based science, vaccines were developed and the world moved on. Indeed, perhaps the biggest success of the period was the quick production of a COVID-19 vaccine. The research behind the mRNA vaccine had been ongoing since the 1970s, but the emergency of the pandemic and international sharing of knowledge helped bring the vaccine to fruition. Today, the COVID-19 vaccine has been credited with saving 2.4 million lives around the world. But now, the U.S. is choosing competition over cooperation. With President Donald Trump's day one executive order to leave the World Health Organization (WHO)—blaming their COVID-19 response—and the shuttering of USAID, the country is taking steps towards further dividing health efforts across the globe. Here in the U.S., a sudden end to $11.4 billion of covid-related grants is stifling national pandemic preparedness efforts on the local and state levels. And most recently, Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. purged experts from the CDC Advisory Committee, putting lives at risk. Historical lessons demonstrate the need for global health infrastructure that works together, shares knowledge, and remembers that pathogens do not stop at borders. White House's Pandemic Office, Busy With Bird Flu, May Shrink Under Trump One of the greatest global health achievements of all time—smallpox eradication—provides a perfect example of what can be done with independent scientific research and international cooperation. During the Cold War between the U.S. and USSR, decades of tension brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Yet, incredibly, the nations managed to find common ground to support the efforts of smallpox eradication. Indeed, they understood the strategic benefits that came from letting public health practitioners and scientists work outside of political divides. The WHO was founded after World War II in 1948. Its formation marked a move from international health, that focused on nations, to global health, that would serve humanity first. The WHO's first eradication effort was the failed, U.S.-backed, Malaria Eradication Program from 1955 to 1969. The Smallpox Eradication Program, with intensive efforts beginning in 1967, provided a chance for redemption for the U.S. and WHO. For the United States, investing in disease eradication and poverty helped to mitigate growing backlash against the Vietnam War. In June of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, 'I propose to dedicate this year to finding new techniques for making man's knowledge serve man's welfare.' He called for 1965—the same year he ordered ground troops to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism —to be a year of international cooperation that could bypass the politics of the Cold War. Previously, the USSR did not participate in the U.S. and WHO's first, failed global eradication plan for malaria. But upon rejoining the WHO in 1956, it was the Soviets who made the first call and investment into global eradication of smallpox in 1958. The WHO functioning as a mediator was crucial to allowing the USSR and the U.S. to work together. It allowed both nations to avoid giving credit to each other; rather success went to science itself. President Johnson called this 'a turning point' away from 'man against man' towards 'man against nature.' The limited role of politicians in the program proved to be key to its success. Scientists made decisions and worked together—no matter what country they came from—by focusing on disease and vaccination, not international tensions. The Soviet-initiated program was lead by Donald A. Henderson, a U.S. epidemiologist, who worked alongside the Russians until the last case of smallpox occurred in Somalia on October 26, 1977. During the 20th century, smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 to 500 million deaths. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated by the WHO in October 1980, and is today still the only human disease to achieve this distinction. Less than a year after the declaration of smallpox eradication, the emergence of another pandemic, the HIV/AIDS crisis, reinforced the importance of science-first cooperation over politically-driven decision making. In June 1981, the first cases of a new unknown disease were reported in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In short order, gay men were stigmatized and blamed in what would become one of the biggest public health disasters of all time. It took years of grassroots science-based activism to move beyond HIV/AIDS victim-blaming and find medical solutions. The Poster Child for AIDS Obscured as Much About the Crisis as He Revealed Too often, governments across the globe placed blame on the gay community for their 'sins' and did not provide needed support, leaving the sick to suffer and die. The pharmaceutical companies profited from the limited medications they had available and did not pursue sufficient development. The FDA process for new drugs was scheduled to take nine years, at a time when life expectancy after receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis was one year. These issues sparked activism, spawning the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) in 1987. ACT UP organizers took science into their own hands and began educating themselves. Members began reading scientific journals religiously, learning the chemistry and epidemiology of drug manufacturing and clinical trials. Members learned how to translate these dense scientific messages to educate the community members on what was—and what was not—being done to help. Because of this work, the FDA changed policies to allow for new treatments to be tested at accelerated rates in times of emergency. ACT UP was able to shift the cultural blame showing that the issue was a result of politics getting in the way of scientific advancements. By 1990, ACT UP influenced the largest federal HIV program to pass Congress, the Ryan White CARE Act. This program was a vital precursor to the 2003 PEPFAR (The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) global initiative. Both of these histories offer a powerful lesson: global health is national health, and national health is local health. With the recent funding cuts from the U.S. government, the future of global health is going in an unknown direction. And yet, the occurrence of pandemics is expected to increase in frequency due to climate change, mass migration, urbanization, and ecosystem destruction. It has been estimated that there is about a 25% chance we will have another COVID-sized pandemic within the next 10 years. No matter how secure the world makes borders, history shows that it can not protect us from disease if we do not have a strong, interconnected public health infrastructure. Luke Jorgensen is a Master of Public Health student at Purdue University where his epidemiology research examines human migration and infectious disease. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@

What to know about the new ‘Nimbus' COVID variant
What to know about the new ‘Nimbus' COVID variant

The Hill

time27 minutes ago

  • The Hill

What to know about the new ‘Nimbus' COVID variant

The World Health Organization is keeping an eye on a new COVID-19 variant called NB.1.8.1, or 'Nimbus,' that has spread across Europe, the Americas and the Western Pacific. Nimbus is a descendant of the Omicron variant of the virus and was first identified in late January. Its spike mutations appear to make it more transmissible than other COVID variants, according to the WHO. Spike mutations refer to changes in spike proteins, which sit on the surface of the virus and help it enter healthy cells. While it is spreading in the U.S. and Canada, along with 20 other countries, it does not appear to be driving an increase in sickness or hospitalization. In April, NB.1.8.1 sequences made up 10.7 percent of all submitted sequences from confirmed COVID infections, up from 2.5 percent a month earlier, according to a risk evaluation released by the WHO. The WHO last month deemed NB.1.8.1 a variant 'under monitoring.' Here's what to know about the variant. Most cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. still stem from the LP.8.1 strain, another Omicron descendant. But it looks like NB.1.8.1 might soon replace it as the more common strain, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC estimates that 37 percent of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. stem from the NB.1.8.1 variant while 38 percent are a result from an infection of the LP.8.1 strain of the disease. At the end of May, the agency estimated that the NB.1.8.1 variant caused about 15 percent of all COVID cases. But the agency notes on its website that due to low numbers of virus sequences being reported, precision in the most recent reporting period is low. The NB.1.8.1 variant has been found in at least 13 states, according to Today, which cited data from the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) database. Those states are: California, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Arizona, Illinois, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington. The available data on 'Nimbus' suggests that it poses a low global threat and that existing COVID-19 vaccines provide adequate protection against severe illness and hospitalization, according to the WHO. 'Currently approved COVID-19 vaccines are expected to remain effective to this variant against symptomatic and severe disease,' reads the WHO's risk evaluation. 'Despite a concurrent increase in cases and hospitalizations in some countries where NB.1.8.1 is widespread, current data do not indicate that this variant leads to more severe illness than other variants in circulation.' Lionel Gesh, an international consultant at the WHO, told The Hill that many new cases in Canada are likely linked to the NB.1.8.1 variant, but that there has not been any major changes in the country in terms of cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions or deaths linked to COVID-19. Symptoms of NB.1.8.1 seem to be similar to those associated with other Omicron variants, according to Gresh. Some common COVID-19 symptoms include cough, fever, fatigue, muscle aches, congestion, headache, nausea, vomiting, and a new loss of smell or taste, according to the CDC. 'We should be as concerned about [NB.1.8.1] as we are concerned for COVID in general,' Gesh said. 'Not more, not less.' Some recent COVID-19 patients have reported experiencing something called 'razor blade throat,' according to Salon. But it is unclear if that symptom is connected to one of the COVID variants or another respiratory illness circulating, Ryan Gregory, an evolutionary and genome biologist at the University of Guelph in Canada, told the outlet.

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders appoints new head for Department of Human Services
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders appoints new head for Department of Human Services

Yahoo

time37 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders appoints new head for Department of Human Services

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. – An announcement from Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Wednesday afternoon marked a change in leadership at the Arkansas Department of Human Services (DHS). The governor announced that Deputy Secretary Janet Mann will serve as the next DHS Secretary. Current DHS Secretary Kristi Putnam is returning to Kentucky and will depart her role on July 25, having served for two and a half years. Arkansas expands Child Care Assistance Program, adds two additional groups Sanders said Putnam had overhauled programs during her time as DHS head, including foster care, Medicaid, maternal health and food stamps, and that the state was fortunate to have Mann stepping into that role. 'My administration was extraordinarily lucky to have someone with her [Putnam's] skillset and leadership in charge of one of the most critical agencies in state government,' the governor said. 'I am grateful that we have someone as qualified as Janet to take over for Kristi and seamlessly continue to make positive changes at DHS.' Federal, state program helps Arkansans who had their SNAP benefits lost due to scam Sanders complimented Mann for her encyclopedic knowledge of DHS and her leadership skills. 'I am honored by Gov. Sanders' decision to select me for this role and am excited to continue the great work Kristi and I have been able to accomplish in this administration,' Mann said. 'We have made enormous progress in providing support to Arkansans who need it and also in working with other agencies for all Arkansans who want a path to economic independence.' Arkansas DHS changing Medicaid dental from managed care to fee-for-service Mann currently serves as the Deputy Secretary of Programs and State Medicaid Director for the DHS. The Program includes Medicaid, aging, substance abuse & mental health, developmental disabilities, provider services & quality assurance, eligibility, child welfare and youth services. The programs serve approximately one in three Arkansans annually, with a total budget of an estimated $11 billion. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store