Life-altering events can happen any time; the FAMLI family leave program can't wait
I got the phone call at 2:39 p.m. on Oct. 16, 2020. After four anxious days of waiting, I heard the voice on the line say, 'I'm so sorry to tell you the tumor we found was malignant – you have cancer.'
As the person on the phone became a muffled 'Peanuts'-esque voice, talking about oncology referrals and scheduling staging scans, I remember curling into a ball on my couch, alone with my cat, the room spinning as a myriad of rapid-fire thoughts ran through my head: 'I'm only 37. I have cancer?! Am I going to die? How do I tell my parents? My family? Friends? Work? What treatments will I need? Surgery? Chemo? What do those cost? What will my insurance cover?'
With little warning, four days after a routine colonoscopy I had because of a family history of polyps, my life suddenly cleaved in two: Before and after my Stage 3 neuroendocrine cancer diagnosis.
As my brain started the first of countless doom spirals, I tried to accept my life-threatening diagnosis, but I was fortunate never to have to ponder, 'Will I lose my job? Can I pay rent? Can I afford groceries?' Thanks to my large employer, I was among the lucky employees in Maryland with access to paid family and medical leave. Only 43% of the workforce have access to paid medical leave and even fewer have access to paid family leave.
Maryland Matters welcomes guest commentary submissions at editor@marylandmatters.org.
We suggest a 750-word limit and reserve the right to edit or reject submissions. We do not accept columns that are endorsements of candidates, and no longer accept submissions from elected officials or political candidates.
Opinion pieces must be signed by at least one individual using their real name. We do not accept columns signed by an organization. Commentary writers must include a short bio and a photo for their bylines.
Views of writers are their own.
I was fortunate to have the time off to confront my situation, but no one should have to rely on luck to fight for their survival or the well-being of their loved ones. That's why we fought so hard to pass the Time to Care Act. In 2022, the Maryland General Assembly enacted it, creating a statewide Family and Medical Leave Insurance (FAMLI) program. A full 88% of Marylanders support this program, and the Maryland Department of Labor has been hard at work preparing to implement it.
Consequently, I am heartbroken by Gov. Wes Moore's proposal to delay the implementation of the FAMLI program for an additional 18 months: an unconscionable amount of time for Marylanders who need time to care today.
When you are faced with a life-threatening diagnosis, you are quickly reminded that the future is a luxury. Delaying this vital program harms every Marylander with a serious illness, caregiving for a loved one facing the end of their life, or welcoming new family members.
These Marylanders might not have an additional 18 months to wait for benefits to begin Jan. 1, 2028. During this proposed delay, over 247,000 Marylanders who would have applied for benefits will instead have to make impossible decisions about which bills to forgo, decide if they should miss a day's pay to sit at a parent's bedside in hospice care or risk bodily harm by returning to work too soon after giving birth.
Everyone needs time to care, and I am a testament to the unpredictability of when you might need paid leave.
The proposed delay has been justified by 'federal uncertainty,' but life doesn't stop because of uncertainty. I was diagnosed with cancer during a worldwide pandemic but care couldn't wait. No other state is delaying the implementation of its FAMLI program in response to the federal administration's recent actions, and Maryland's FAMLI program does not rely on federal funding.
Maryland was lauded as a national leader when it passed the Time to Care Act, but each year the implementation gets delayed and other states move ahead with starting their paid leave programs, Maryland gets left behind.
By keeping the FAMLI program on its current implementation timeline, the Moore-Miller administration can provide certainty to Marylanders facing the uncertainty of a life-threatening illness that they won't lose their income while navigating their care.
As a cancer survivor, I believe when facing an uncertain future you center your values, you stand beside each other, and you do the next right thing even if you can't see far into the distance. We may not be able to predict everything the future will bring, but the next right thing is for Maryland to hold fast to its values by keeping the FAMLI program on its current implementation timeline.
Marylanders should feel secure in knowing that facing life's best and most challenging times won't also create an economic tragedy. We can't delay promised progress because of the fear of some undefined uncertainty. Now is the moment to champion the timely implementation of FAMLI leave in Maryland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
31-07-2025
- CBS News
Growing population of older adults in Maryland, cuts to federal programs prompt creation of support plan
Maryland launched a 10-year plan Wednesday to support older adults, as officials said the population of aging residents is growing and some federal resources are facing cuts. The Longevity Ready Maryland plan aims to transform the state's care system to be more accommodating and accessible for older residents. According to Gov. Wes Moore's office, Maryland is currently home to nearly 1.4 million residents over the age of 60. That number is growing faster than the national average and is expected to surpass a quarter of the state's population within the next five years. The plan comes as some federal programs are facing budget and workforce cuts directed by the Trump administration. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) have all been subject to changes as the White House aims to reduce government spending and increase efficiency. "While some in Washington threaten to pull the rug out from under our residents, placing greater strain on state resources, Maryland is stepping forward with urgency and a clear plan to put the well-being of older Marylanders front and center," Gov. Moore said in a statement. According to the governor's office, cuts to some low-income home energy assistance programs and housing initiatives in the state will disproportionately impact older residents, many of whom are on fixed incomes. "Reductions or eliminations of these social care programs will have a cascading effect, placing increased pressure on older, low-income Marylanders' ability to remain healthy, safely housed, and living in the community," the governor said. More than 127,000 older adults in Maryland rely on SNAP benefits for their nutritional needs, and more than 109,000 rely on Medicaid for their health services, the governor's office said. Growing dementia rates, a lack of affordable housing, and increasing health care costs are posing urgent challenges in the state, according to Gov. Moore. Maryland's long-term plan to support aging residents involves coordinating services and policies that will help the population. State leaders hope to consolidate resources and coordinate between government agencies, businesses and communities to ensure residents get the care they need. The Maryland Department of Aging will help by improving access to home- and community-based services and coordinating initiatives between state agencies, according to the governor's office. Under the plan, the state will also launch a new dementia navigation program that will provide funding for local resources through Area Agencies on Aging offices. "Born from a two-year, ground-up effort, this plan reflects the voices of older adults, caregivers, and community leaders from every corner of our state. Longevity Ready Maryland is our commitment to action—a roadmap to ensure all Marylanders can live healthy, financially secure, socially connected, and purposeful lives," said state Department of Aging Secretary Carmel Roques.
Yahoo
19-06-2025
- Yahoo
U.S. Supreme Court upholds Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors
Demonstrators outside the U.S. Supreme Court in December, when justices heard arguments in a case about Tennessee ban on gender-affirming care for minors. The court upheld the law Wednesday. (Photo by) The U.S. Supreme Court, in a potential landmark decision, upheld Tennessee's law prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors, saying children who seek the treatment don't qualify as a protected class. In United States v. Skrmetti, the high court ruled 6-3 Wednesday to overturn a lower court's finding that the restrictions violate the constitutional rights of children seeking puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria. The U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the district court's decision and sent it to the high court. The court's three liberal justices dissented, writing that the court had abandoned transgender children and their families to 'political whims.' Tennessee lawmakers passed the legislation in 2023, leading to a lawsuit argued before the Supreme Court last December. The federal government, under the Biden administration, took up the case for the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal and three transgender teens, their families and a Memphis doctor who challenged the law, but the Department of Justice under President Donald Trump dropped its opposition. In its ruling, the court said that the plaintiffs argued that Senate Bill 1 'warrants heightened scrutiny because it relies on sex-based classifications.' But the court found that neither of the classifications considered, those based on age and medical use, are determined on sex. 'Rather, SB1 prohibits healthcare providers from administering puberty blockers or hormones to minors for certain medical uses, regardless of a minor's sex,' the ruling states. The ruling says the application of the law 'does not turn on sex,' either, because it doesn't prohibit certain medical treatments for minors of one sex while allowing it for minors of the opposite sex. In Pride month, transgender Marylanders reflect on strengths, weaknesses, of state protections Tennessee's House Republican Caucus issued a statement calling it 'a proud day for the Volunteer State and for all who believe in protecting the innocence and well-being of America's children.' Tennessee Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson, who sponsored the bill, said he is grateful the court ruled that states hold the authority to protect children from 'irreversible medical procedures.' 'The simple message the Supreme Court has sent the world is 'enough is enough,'' Johnson said in a statement. The Tennessee Equality Project, an LGBTQ advocacy group, expressed dismay at the decision. 'We are profoundly disappointed by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to side with the Tennessee legislature's anti-transgender ideology and further erode the rights of transgender children and their families and doctors,' the group said in a statement. 'We are grateful to the plaintiffs, families, and the ACLU for fighting on behalf of more than 1.3 million transgender adults and 300,000 youth across the nation.' The group said gender-affirming care saves lives and is supported by medical groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Medical Association. The court also rejected plaintiffs' argument that the law enforces 'a government preference that people conform to expectations about their sex.' The court found that laws that classify people on the basis of sex require closer scrutiny if they involve 'impermissible stereotypes.' But if the law's classifications aren't covertly or overtly based on sex, heightened review by the court isn't required unless the law is motivated by 'invidious discriminatory purpose.' 'And regardless, the statutory findings on which SB1 is premised do not themselves evince sex-based stereotyping,' the ruling says. In response to the outcome, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said Tennessee voters' common sense won over 'judicial activism' on a law spurred by an increase in treatment for transgender children. 'I commend the Tennessee legislature and Governor [Bill] Lee for their courage in passing this legislation and supporting our litigation despite withering opposition from the Biden administration, LGBT special interest groups, social justice activists, the American Medical Association, the American Bar Association, and even Hollywood,' Skrmetti said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., criticized the ruling just moments after it came out when asked about it during a press conference. 'This Supreme Court seems to have forgotten that one of their jobs is to protect individual rights and protect individuals from being discriminated against,' Schumer said. 'It's an awful decision.' Democrats, he said, are 'going to explore every solution,' though he didn't elaborate. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the opinion that the case 'carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field.' 'The voices in these debates raise sincere concerns; the implications for all are profound. The Equal Protection Clause does not resolve these disagreements. Nor does it afford us license to decide them as we see best,' Roberts wrote. 'Our role is not 'to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic' of the law before us, but only to ensure that it does not violate the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment. Having concluded it does not, we leave questions regarding its policy to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process,' he wrote. The ACLU said in a statement the decision is based on the record and context of the Tennessee case and doesn't extend to other cases involving transgender status and discrimination. Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project, called the ruling 'devastating,' but despite the setback said transgender people still have healthcare options. 'The court left undisturbed Supreme Court and lower court precedent that other examples of discrimination against transgender people are unlawful,' Strangio said in a statement. – This article first appeared in the Tennessee Lookout, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Tennessee Lookout maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Holly McCall for questions: info@
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Yahoo
Van Hollen, other Dems push legislation to boost Medicaid and counter Trump cuts
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) in a file photo from February. (Photo by Bryan P. Sears/Maryland Matters) Senate Democrats unveiled a package of bills Thursday aimed at expanding access to health care coverage, including one bill modeled after a successful Maryland law that lets taxpayers use their tax returns to enroll in care. Sen. Chris Van Hollen's (D-Md.) 'Easy Enrollment in Health Care Act' is one of about a dozen bills — including one from Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) requiring Medicaid and Medicare to provide dental, vision and hearing coverage — put forward by Democratic senators as a response to the Trump administration's efforts to cut federal health care spending. 'We're all here for those two reasons,' Van Hollen said Thursday at a Capitol Hill news conference to unveil the bills. 'One is to shine a light on the great damage and harm the Trump Republican plan will do. But also to put forward some ideas about what we could be doing to actually make health care better for more Americans.' Van Hollen joined Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Democratic Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada and Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico to unveil the bills. The Democratic legislation comes at a time when the Senate is deliberating the Republican-backed 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' The budget reconciliation bill would implement a number of Trump agenda items, including drastic cuts to Medicaid and other supports that backers say are needed to rein in what they call 'waste, fraud and abuse' in those programs. With a Republican majority in both the Senate and the House, Wyden acknowledged that the Democratic bills have little chance of passage. But. he said, Democrats still hope Republicans will work with them on the legislation and 'do the right thing.' Report: Up to 100,000 Marylanders could lose coverage if Medicaid imposes work requirements Democrats and health care advocates say the budget reconciliation bill would create more administrative hurdles for Medicaid recipients and will result in millions of people losing coverage, even if they would be eligible for the joint state-federal health care program. 'It's 'beautiful' if you're a billionaire or a very wealthy person. For everybody else, it's an ugly mess,' Van Hollen said of the GOP bill. 'It comes at the expense of everybody else in America. And that's especially true when it comes to attacking health care … In fact, it will kick 16 million Americans off their health insurance plans.' He said his bill, modeled after Maryland's 'Easy Enrollment' program, would do the opposite. In Maryland, Easy Enrollment lets people check a box on their state tax forms to allow the state to use information on the return to see if their household qualifies for Medicaid. Those who qualify then get further information on what options they qualify for, reducing administrative hurdles to Medicaid and other programs in Maryland. 'What we should do is make it easier for eligible individuals to get the Medicaid that they are eligible for,' Van Hollen said. This is the second time he has introduced the bill in Congress. A version introduced in the last Congress never even got a committee hearing. The other Democrats at the press conference offered their own bills to strengthen Medicaid. Cortez Masto's bill would increase funding for health care fraud investigation units to help catch more waste, fraud, and abuse in the system. She says that is more productive than just cutting funds to Medicaid. Luján is sponsoring a bill to temporarily expand federal funding to Medicaid programs for home- and community-based services that help support people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Wyden also highlighted his own legislation to address hospital labor and delivery unit closures by supporting rural hospitals with additional Medicaid dollars. 'Fact of the matter is that Democrats want to make it easier for Americans to get health care, rather than put people who desperately need health care through bureaucratic water torture if they're going to get the health care they need,' Wyden said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
