The push to defund Planned Parenthood hit other clinics in Maine. Now their group is suing
Maine Family Planning filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration Wednesday seeking to restore the reimbursements.
Accessing health care in Maine — one of the Northeast's poorest states and its most rural — is a challenge in areas far from population centers such as Portland and Bangor.
Vanessa Shields-Haas, a nurse practitioner, said the organization's clinics have been seeing all patients as usual and completing Medicaid paperwork for visits — but not submitting it because it appears the provision took effect as soon as the law was signed.
'Knowing how hard it is to access care in this state, not allowing these community members to access their care, it's cruel,' Shields-Haas said.
Maine clinics appear to be only others included in cuts
Republican lawmakers targeted Planned Parenthood in one piece of what President Donald Trump dubbed the 'big beautiful' bill that Congress passed and the president signed earlier this month.
While advocates focused on Planned Parenthood, the bill did not mention it by name. Instead, it cut off reimbursements for organizations that are primarily engaged in family planning services — which generally include things such as contraception, abortion and pregnancy tests — and received more than $800,000 from Medicaid in 2023.
The U.S. Senate's parliamentarian rejected a 2017 effort to defund Planned Parenthood because it was written to exclude all other providers by barring payments only to groups that received more than $350 million a year in Medicaid funds. The not-for-profit Maine organization asserts in its legal challenge that the threshold was lowered to $800,000 this time around to make sure Planned Parenthood would not be the only affected entity.
It is the only other organization that has come forward publicly to say that its funding is at risk, too.
Federal law already bars taxpayer money from covering most abortions. Instead, the money in question involves other health services, such as cancer screenings and tests, and treatment for sexually transmitted infections.
Proponents of that wrinkle in the law say abortion providers use Medicaid money for other services to subsidize abortion.
'This has never been just about Planned Parenthood,' Autumn Christensen, vice president of public policy for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement. 'It's about any Big Abortion business or network that performs abortions. Taxpayers should never be forced to prop up an industry that profits from ending human lives.'
The Associated Press has sought comment from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is named in the lawsuit.
Maine Family Planning goes beyond abortion
Maine Family Planning operates 18 clinics across the state.
In 2024, it had about 7,200 family planning patients, including 645 who obtained abortions. Services include pregnancy testing, contraception, family planning counseling, breast exams, cancer screenings and treatment of sexually transmitted infections.
Some of the sites also offer primary care services, where there are another 600 or so patients. There are about 800 gender-affirming care patients and about 200 who use its upstart mobile clinic, said George Hill, the president and CEO of the organization.
Hill said that for about two-thirds of its patients, Maine Family Planning is the only place they get medical care in a typical year.
About half of the patients not seeking abortions are enrolled in Medicaid, and the clinics have been receiving about $1.9 million a year in reimbursements, which accounts for about one-fourth of the organization's budget.
'It's a difficult state to provide care in and now we're facing this,' Hill said. In its lawsuit, the group says it has enough reserves to keep seeing patients covered by Medicaid without reimbursement only through October.
Finding health care can be a struggle in this rural state
Maine Family Planning says that if it had to turn away patients, it would be more complicated for them than simply finding another provider. There aren't enough in rural areas, the group notes — and many don't accept Medicaid.
One patient, Ashley Smith, said she started going to Maine Family Planning about five years ago when she could not find other health care she could afford. While she's not enrolled in Medicaid, she fears clinics could be shuttered because of cuts.
'I am so worried that if my clinic closes, I don't know what I'll do or if I'll be able to see another provider,' Smith said.
Maine Family Planning also supports care at more than 40 other health care facilities. Other than the Planned Parenthood locations that receive money from Maine Family Planning, those other providers don't stand to lose their Medicaid reimbursements.
But, Hill said, the loss of Medicaid funding for Maine Family Planning would mean the group would have less to send to partners.
The Maine clinics say the law violates their right to equal protection
The Center for Reproductive Rights, which is representing Maine Family Planning in the challenge, says in its legal filing that the defunding denies it equal protection under the law because it would have funding cut off, but organizations that provide similar services would not.
'The administration would rather topple a statewide safety network than let a patient get a cancer screening at a facility that also offers abortion care,' Meetra Mehdizadeh, a Center for Reproductive Rights lawyer, said in an interview.
Planned Parenthood already sued and won a reprieve from a judge, preventing its Medicaid payments cutoff — at least until July 21 — while a court considers that case.
Planned Parenthood has warned that the law could put 200 of its affiliates' roughly 600 clinics across the U.S. at risk of closing.
___
Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
This 'Then And Now' Picture Of The Oval Office Is Going Viral And Says So, So Much About The Trump Administration
Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images Donald Trump has completely transformed the Oval Office into his own gaudy, gold fantasy land. Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images It's A LOT. Andrew Harnik / Getty Images You've got the gold crown molding. Bloomberg / Bloomberg via Getty Images The fireplace is cluttered with gold statues. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images He's got gold coasters. SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images And then there's a TON of these gold squiggly things all over the picture from the White House really shows how many gold accents have been added to the Oval Office. This is how it looked last year: michellelprice/Twitter: @michellelprice From this: To this: Look at all that gold!!! Well, since then, Trump has SOMEHOW managed to add even more gold. @JoeMyGod posted this "then and now" picture that is going super viral: From this: To this: "It's like the Dollar Tree version of Versailles," one person joked. "Which one seems more fiscally responsible...." another person asked. And this person said, "I hope that lovely fireplace can be restored with no damage." Thoughts on the renovations?! Solve the daily Crossword
Bloomberg
21 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Bipartisan Outrage Over Epstein Is Just What America Needs
The controversy over the mysterious ' Epstein Files,' which President Donald Trump's administration first pledged to release and then decided not to, has Democrats back in touch with one of America's great political traditions: anti-establishment conspiracy theories. Not only is this good for the party, it is also — dare I say it — healthy for US politics. Theories of this type differ from the more extreme Russiagate allegations against Trump (or Trump's infamous charges that Barack Obama was secretly born in Kenya) in that they are not narrowly partisan. As such, they are especially appealing to the kinds of people who are disengaged from politics and alienated from mainstream institutions. In other words, just the kinds of people who've flocked to Trump's banner over the past decade.
Washington Post
21 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Allergies seem nearly impossible to avoid — unless you're Amish
Whether triggered by pollen, pet dander or peanuts, allergies in this day and age seem nearly impossible to avoid. But one group appears virtually immune, a mystery to experts who study allergies. Despite the increasing rate of allergic diseases, both in industrialized and in developing countries, the Amish remain exceptionally — and bafflingly — resistant. Only 7 percent of Amish children had a positive response to one or more common allergens in a skin prick test, compared with more than half of the general U.S. population. Even children from other traditional farming families, who still have lower rates of allergic disease than nonfarm children, are more allergic than the Amish. In fact, one Amish community living in northern Indiana is considered one of the least allergic populations ever measured in the developed world. 'Generally, across the country, about 8 to 10 percent of kids have asthma. In the Amish kids, it's probably 1 to 2 percent,' said Carole Ober, chair of human genetics at the University of Chicago. 'A few of them do have allergies, but at much, much lower rates compared to the general population.' Now, Ober and other researchers are trying to discover what makes Amish and other traditional farming communities unique, in the hopes of developing a protective treatment that could be given to young children. For instance, a probiotic or essential oil that contains substances found in farm dust, such as microbes and the molecules they produce, could stimulate children's immune systems in a way that prevents allergic disease. 'Certain kinds of farming practices, particularly the very traditional ones, have this extraordinary protective effect in the sense that, in these communities, asthma and allergies are virtually unknown,' said Donata Vercelli, a professor of cellular and molecular medicine at the University of Arizona. 'The studies that have been done in these farming populations are critical because they tell us that protection is an attainable goal.' The Amish are members of a Christian group who practice traditional farming — many live on single-family dairy farms — and use horses for fieldwork and transportation. As of 2024, around 395,000 Amish live in the United States, concentrated mostly in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana. Over the past century, the incidence of allergic diseases — including hay fever (allergic rhinitis), asthma, food allergies and eczema — has increased dramatically. Hay fever, or an allergic reaction to tree, grass and weed pollens, emerged as the first recognized allergic disease in the early 1800s, climbing to epidemic levels in Europe and North America by 1900. The 1960s saw a sharp increase in the prevalence of pediatric asthma, a condition in which the airways tighten when breathing in an allergen. From the 1990s onward, there has been an upswing in the developed world in food allergies, including cow's milk, peanut and egg allergies. Urbanization, air pollution, dietary changes and an indoor lifestyle are often cited as possible factors. The 'hygiene hypothesis' — first proposed in a 1989 study by American immunologist David Strachan — suggests that early childhood exposure to microbes protects against allergic diseases by contributing to the development of a healthy immune system. The study found that hay fever and eczema were less common among children born into larger families. Strachan wondered whether unhygienic contact with older siblings served as a protection against allergies. Subsequent findings have given support to the hygiene hypothesis, such as that children who grow up with more household pets are less likely to develop asthma, hay fever or eczema. Perhaps even more beneficial than having older siblings or pets, however, is growing up on a farm. (More than 150 years ago, hay fever was known as an 'aristocratic disease,' almost wholly confined to the upper classes of society. Farmers appeared relatively immune.) This 'farm effect' has been confirmed by studies on agricultural populations around the world, including in the United States, Europe, Asia and South America. But even among farming communities, the most pronounced effect appears to be in the Amish. In a study of 60 schoolchildren by Ober, Vercelli and their colleagues, the prevalence of asthma was four times lower in the Amish as compared with the Hutterites, another U.S. farming community with a similar genetic ancestry and lifestyle. The prevalence of allergic sensitization — the development of antibodies to allergens and the first step to developing an allergy — was six times higher in the Hutterites. The researchers first ruled out a genetic cause; in fact, an analysis showed that the Amish and Hutterite children were remarkably similar in their ancestral roots. Instead, the main difference between these two populations seemed to be the amount of exposure as young children to farm animals or barns. 'The Hutterite kids and pregnant moms don't go into the animal barns. Kids aren't really exposed to the animal barns until they're like 12 or so, when they start learning how to do the work on the farm,' Ober said. 'The Amish kids are in and out of the cow barns all day long from an early age.' When analyzing samples of Amish and Hutterite house dust, they found a microbial load almost seven times higher in Amish homes. Later experiments showed that the airways of mice that inhaled Amish dust had dramatically reduced asthmalike symptoms when exposed to allergens. Mice that inhaled Hutterite dust did not receive the same benefit. Now, Ober and Vercelli are beginning to identify the protective agents in Amish dust that prevent allergic asthma. In 2023, their analysis of farm dust found proteins that act like delivery trucks, loaded with molecules produced by microbes and plants. When these transport proteins deliver their cargo to the mucus that lines the respiratory tract, it creates a protective environment that regulates airway responses and prevents inflammation. 'We don't really talk about the hygiene hypothesis as much anymore because we now understand that it's not really about how hygienic you're living,' said Kirsi Järvinen-Seppo, director of the Center for Food Allergy at the University of Rochester Medical Center. 'It's more like a microbial hypothesis, since beneficial bacteria that colonize the gut and other mucosal surfaces play a significant role.' During the first year or two of life, a baby's immune system is rapidly developing and highly malleable by environmental stimuli, such as bacteria. Some experts believe that exposing young children to certain types of beneficial bacteria can engage and shape the growing immune system in a way that reduces the risk of allergic diseases later in life. Farm dust contains a hodgepodge of bacteria shed from livestock and animal feed that isn't harmful enough to cause illness, but does effectively train the immune system to become less responsive to allergens later in life. In 2021, Järvinen-Seppo and her colleagues compared the gut microbiomes of 65 Old Order Mennonite infants from a rural community in New York with 39 urban/suburban infants from nearby Rochester. Like the Amish, the Old Order Mennonites follow a traditional agrarian lifestyle. Almost three-fourths of Mennonite infants in the study were colonized with B. infantis, a bacterium associated with lower rates of allergic diseases, in contrast to 21 percent of Rochester infants. 'The colonization rate is very low in the United States and other Western countries, compared to very high rates in Mennonite communities, similar to some developing countries,' Järvinen-Seppo said. 'This mirrors the rates of autoimmune and allergic diseases.' These clues about the origin of the farm effect represent a step toward the prevention of allergic diseases, Järvinen-Seppo says. Whatever form the treatment takes, the impact on prevention of allergic diseases, which affect millions of people worldwide and reduce quality of life, could be enormous, experts say. 'I don't know that we can give every family a cow. … But we are learning from these time-honored and very stable environments what type of substances and exposures are needed,' Vercelli said. 'Once we know that, I don't think there will be any impediment to creating protective strategies along these lines.'
