Is Florida Hiding Maternal Mortality Data? Or Just Refusing to Track It?

4.6.26

Click to skip ahead: Is Florida Hiding its Maternal Mortality Data?; Ballot Box: Wisconsin; In the States: Mississippi, Georgia; The White House Is Pushing Childbirth, But No Child Care; What Does “Pro-Life” Title X Look Like?; Abortion Bans Repel Healthcare Workers; Policing Pregnancy; Listen Up; Veteran Abortion Ban Continues

---

Is Florida Hiding its Maternal Mortality Data?

It’s been nearly two years since Florida passed a six-week abortion ban, yet—for some inexplicable reason—the state’s health department hasn’t released any data on maternal mortality. Wonder why!

The Florida Tributary reports that the state’s maternal mortality committee has gone dark in recent years, failing to release maternal death data. When reporter Kate Payne asked the Florida health department about the gap, the agency quietly uploaded a few skeletal reports to its website—but only included data on 2021, 2022, and 2023.

Florida’s abortion ban didn’t go into effect until 2024.

Payne notes that the reports “are significantly more narrow compared to reports from previous years,” and that they omit the names of committee members. “It’s also not clear who appoints the committee members or whether they are required to possess a medical degree or other relevant credentials,” she writes.

This aligns with what Abortion, Every Day has found in other Republican-led states: Texas refused to report on maternal deaths in 2022 and 2023—the two years after the state passed an abortion ban. The state also stacked its committee with anti-abortion activists. In Idaho, Republicans disbanded their committee entirely before public pressure forced them to bring it back. And after someone on Georgia’s maternal mortality committee told ProPublica that the state ban was killing women, GOP officials fired every single one of the committee’s 32 members. Afterwards, they refused to release the names of the new members.

In short, Republicans are systematically burying maternal death reports and dismantling the committees that put them together. That’s to say nothing of the anti-abortion push to broadly sow distrust in maternal mortality data and push their own, skewed numbers.

We know why: abortion bans kill women, and anti-abortion lawmakers and activists are desperate to stop voters from finding that out. Unfortunately for them, we won’t let that happen. Make sure to spread the word on this one.

Ballot Box: Wisconsin

Wisconsin voters head to the polls tomorrow to decide whether pro-choice Chris Taylor or anti-abortion Maria Lazar will sit on the state Supreme Court. This will be the third state Supreme Court race in Wisconsin since the end of Roe—and every single one has been focused on abortion rights.

If the past two elections are any indication, we’re in good shape: In 2023, Wisconsin voters elected pro-choice judge Janet Protasiewicz; last year, they chose pro-choice Susan Crawford.

That’s why Lazar has been desperately trying to hide her anti-abortion extremism—promising not to “legislate from the bench.” But Taylor has been hitting her on the issue nonstop—as she should—like releasing ads that highlight Lazar’s ties to radical groups that would deny rape victims access to care.

The candidates went head to head on the issue in a debate last week. Once again, Lazar tried to appear moderate—calling the state’s 20-week ban a compromise and saying she would “100% respect” Wisconsin’s precedent on abortion. But Taylor mopped the floor with her opponent, pointing out that Lazar would have voted for an 1849 abortion ban and telling voters to look up her comments on abortion themselves.

You can watch the full debate here, but we have a snippet below that’s worth a watch:

In the States: Mississippi, Georgia

The Mississippi legislature just passed a bill that would punish those who distribute abortion pills—or “intend to distribute”—with 10 years in prison. That language is extremely alarming, and it mirrors the free speech attacks we’ve been seeing across the country. The good news is that intent is extremely hard to prove.

The real goal? Instill a chilling effect that makes people too afraid to help each other. Basically, Republicans know that telemedicine medication abortions make up nearly 30% of all abortions, and that it allows women to sidestep their bans.

The legislation now heads to anti-abortion extremist Gov. Tate Reeves’ desk.

Georgia midwives are suing the state over its costly, cumbersome barriers to provide care. Right now, Georgia law requires nurse-midwives to have written agreements with physicians, detailing when doctors will intervene with patients. What’s more, those agreements often require midwives to pay for their time and liability insurance—the cost of which can prevent midwives from working.

Please remember: midwives provide life-saving, often culturally competent care to marginalized communities—including patients who may fear navigating medical racism in traditional hospital settings. And as Center for Reproductive Rights attorney Hillary Schneller points out, “There are some places in the state where there’s nowhere to give birth or access pregnancy care nearby.”

“We have midwives, including our clients, who are ready and willing to fill that gap to serve those families, and the state is treating them like criminals.”

In fact, sometimes that’s true literally: in addition to restrictive laws that make it difficult to work, midwives are also facing an increasing threat of criminalization. It wasn’t so long ago that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton charged a midwife with several felonies for allegedly providing a medication abortion.

Quick hits:

• KJZZ has more on the Arizona bill that would make providing abortion pills a felony;

• North Carolina Republicans are urging an appeals court to revisit restrictions on mifepristone in a case that’s been on hold since 2024;

• And the Guttmacher Institute shows that Illinois remains a safe haven for people seeking abortion care.

The White House Is Pushing Childbirth, But No Child Care

The Trump administration has repeatedly made clear they want us to have more babies immediately—whether we can take care of them or not. And this week, Donald Trump made clear he isn’t going to help on that front, saying:

“We can’t take care of daycare. We’re a big country. We’re fighting wars. It’s not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these things.”

We shouldn’t be surprised: In 2024, JD Vance—despite his downright bizarre obsession with boosting the federal birth rate—seemingly dismissed the idea of universal child care:

“One of the ways that you might be able to relieve a little bit of pressure on people who are paying so much for daycare is make it so that, you know, maybe grandma and grandpa wants to help out a little bit more.”

This is the state of ‘pro-life,’ ‘pro-family’ politics: funding wars over support for families.

And remember, this comes as the administration and its conservative powerhouse supporters are trying to push young women out of college and into early marriage and motherhood:

Project 2026. And 2027, and 2028....

What Does “Pro-Life” Title X Look Like?

Last week, we warned that the Trump administration is planning to direct the family planning funding to organizations that “prioritize life and promote the pro-family agenda.” We predicted that the White House would reroute those federal dollars to crisis pregnancy centers, but there’s so much more to what a ‘pro-life’ Title X program could look like.

Under the first Trump administration, for example, the White House denied funds to those who provided, referred, or even spoke about abortion. The goal was to force Planned Parenthood grantees out of the federal program. This second Trump administration could go further:

As the anti-abortion movement targets IVF, the administration might force Title X recipients to hold anti-IVF positions, teach about ‘natural fertility’ treatments, or push the administration’s aggressive pro-natalist messaging—including to teens.

‘Pro-life’ and ‘pro-family’ standards might also include approving of some birth control methods but not others—like emergency contraception or IUDs, which conservatives claim are really abortions. (The administration has already classified common forms of birth control as “abortifacients.”)

Even right now, as the administration promises to fulfill its legal obligation to dispense Title X funds, the delays in that process could seriously disrupt clinics’ ability to provide care. Dr. Nomsa Khalfani, CEO of Essential Access Health, says:

“While we are encouraged to see funding move forward, the recent delays have underscored the instability of federal family planning funding… Gaps in care have real and immediate public health consequences.”

As always, we’ll keep you updated as we learn more.

Abortion Bans Repel Healthcare Workers

Thank goodness for telemedicine abortion access. Even before the end of Roe, abortion pills were a lifeline for low-income patients who would otherwise need to shoulder costs like travel, time off from work, or child care.

So it should come as no surprise that a new study in the American Journal of Public Health reports that people who experience food insecurity are more likely to choose telemedicine abortion. Researchers looked at 1,700 telemedicine abortion patients from 2021 to 2022, and found that in addition to the expected financial hurdles, people chose telehealth because of worries around judgement and discrimination at in-person clinics.

Telehealth abortion is also increasingly important as reproductive healthcare deserts grow in states with bans. Another new study, this one published in JAMA Network Open, found that there’s been a decline in applications to medical residency programs in banned and restrictive states—particularly among those specializing in reproductive care.

It’s no mystery why: Who on earth wants to face the threat of criminalization and state surveillance for doing their job?

This isn’t new information, of course. Multiple studies have shown a similar trend since the end of Roe, while banned states lose providers in an OBGYN exodus. (Idaho, for example, lost nearly a third of its OBGYNs and half of the state’s maternal fetal medicine specialists.) We also know that medical school graduates are less likely to apply for residencies in anti-abortion states, especially prospective OBGYNs.

That said, it’s not just reproductive health providers who are increasingly reluctant to live in banned states. In fact, large swaths of the labor force refuse to work in states that ban abortion, with everyday citizens—young people, in particular—moving away. High school students are even rethinking where they go to college based on bans.

Policing Pregnancy

Last week, Lizelle Gonzalez—who was charged with murder in Texas for self-managing an abortion—lost her wrongful arrest suit against the prosecutor who targeted her. As AED noted, the ruling sends a dangerous message to any cops and prosecutors who are eager to arrest women over their pregnancy outcomes.

Over at Slate, law professor Mary Ziegler agrees. She writes that Gonzalez had a really good case: Texas doesn’t allow women to be prosecuted for ending their own pregnancies! Still, she lost.

“That speaks to just how hard it will be for future plaintiffs to hold officials accountable. Not every state’s law is as clear as Texas’. If Gonzalez loses, it’s hard to see who can prevail….Prosecutions of abortion seekers are only going to increase, and prosecutors will see rulings like this one as a green light to ignore the laws that claim to protect them.”

We desperately need a case that makes a public example of these zealot prosecutors and cops—not just to stop the criminalization, but to ensure that women aren’t too afraid to seek out healthcare.

After all, most of the criminal cases we’ve seen since the end of Roe have involved patients turned in by their healthcare providers. Capital B News notes that Black women watching the arrest of Alexia Moore in Georgia, for example, might be discouraged from seeking prenatal care.

Considering the poor maternal and infant health outcomes for Black women and babies—and that Georgia already has the second highest maternal mortality rate in the nation—that could have a disastrous outcome.

Pregnancy Justice’s Karen Thompson warned:

“It’s really about making people terrified, and that’s exactly what I think is happening in some ways… when you see someone’s mug shot, when you hear all of these stories.”

Listen Up

If you’re looking for something to listen to on your work commute, NPR’s “1A” podcast did a deep dive on the state of abortion access:

Veteran Abortion Ban Continues

The Trump administration’s abortion ban for veterans lives on. Last month, the Senate rejected a Democratic proposal to reinstate coverage of abortion care for veterans by a 50-48 margin.

Author of the proposal, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, pointed out that abortion access is especially crucial for veterans, as “many of them suffer from service-connected disabilities that increase the risks associated with pregnancy, and many have experienced military sexual trauma during their time of service.”

We know that women are the fastest-growing demographic in the military. Paired with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s opposition to women in combat roles, this ban on essential reproductive care for veterans is just the latest demonstration of this administration’s extreme hostility to female service members.

At the same time the Trump administration is seeking an additional $200 billion for war in Iran, the GOP’s attacks on reproductive care for service members are only escalating. Speaker Johnson also recently led the charge against IVF coverage for active-duty service members.