This new program will build upon the existing programs currently provided by the IRC of Phoenix, including support in areas of resettlement, finance, community integration, and health. The objectives of this new prenatal-focused program are to serve the needs of pregnant refugee women by providing the physical and emotional support they need through partnerships with hospitals (such as Saint Joseph’s Hospital) and organizations (such as the Refugee Women’s Health Clinic of Phoenix).
The target audience includes women who seek refuge in the Phoenix area in the midst of a pregnancy, or with the intention to become pregnant and who are receiving other services from the IRC of Phoenix. This grant will fund a prenatal care caseworker position for as long as there are incoming funds and pregnant refugee women in Phoenix. The prenatal care caseworker’s duties include:
● Monitoring the overall health of pregnant refugee women assisted by the IRC of Phoenix
● Expanding access to prenatal care for pregnant refugee women
● Connecting pregnant refugee women with necessary information on healthy pregnancies and introducing them to childcare programs that the IRC of Phoenix currently provides
● Creating and maintaining strong relationships with hospitals and health care facilities
● Accompanying pregnant refugee women to medical appointments as needed
● Participating in all other duties necessary to ensure the safe pregnancy of refugee women under the care of the IRC of Phoenix
To evaluate the success of the program, the IRC of Phoenix will monitor the number of pregnant refugee women seeking help and monitor health to see how the women are being served and the number of these women who are fully served based on the above objectives. The required grant money needed each year amounts to $40,000. A multi-year commitment of at least five years is expected. This funding represents the annual salary of the newly hired caseworker, and the IRC of Phoenix will be covering administration costs, supplies, and equipment.
In the 2014 case Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the US Supreme Court ruled that the contraceptive mandate promulgated under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violated privately held, for-profit corporations’ right to religious freedom. The contraception mandate, issued in 2012 by the US Department of Health and Human Services, required that employer-provided health insurance plans offer their beneficiaries certain contraceptive methods free of charge. In a five to four decision, the US Supreme Court maintained that the mandate, in cases of privately held, for-profit organizations like Hobby Lobby Inc., violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. Although the Court did not decide on the constitutionality of the mandate, their ruling enabled privately held, for-profit corporations that objected to the contraceptive mandate on religious grounds to be exempt from it.
Dorothy Andersen studied cystic fibrosis in the United States during the early 1900s. In 1935, Andersen discovered lesions in the pancreas of an infant during an autopsy, which led her to classify a condition she named cystic fibrosis of the pancreas. In 1938, Andersen became the first to thoroughly describe symptoms of the medical condition cystic fibrosis. Commonly mistaken for celiac disease prior to the 1900s, Andersen defined cystic fibrosis as the build-up of pancreatic fluid in the body caused by the blockage of pancreatic ducts, and she determined that the two conditions were symptomatically different. Andersen developed an early method for
diagnosing cystic fibrosis. By conceptualizing cystic fibrosis and
defining its symptoms, Andersen laid the foundation for treatments that
enabled infants diagnosed with the disease to survive into adulthood.
Better babies contests were competitions held in state fairs throughout the US during the early twentieth century in which babies between the ages of 6 and 48 months were judged for their health. In 1908, social activist Mary de Garmo established and held the first better babies contest at the Louisiana State Fair in Shreveport, Louisiana. The contests, mirroring theories established in the US’s eugenics movement of the twentieth century, aimed to establish standards for judging infant health. Nurses and physicians judged infants participating in the contest on mental health, physical health, and physical appearance. In 1913, the Woman’s Home Companion (WHC) magazine cosponsored de Garmo’s better babies contests and introduced the competition to state fairs throughout the US. Better babies contests helped promote routine health assessments of children by medical professionals.
Better babies contests were competitions held in state fairs throughout the US during the early twentieth century in which babies between the ages of 6 and 48 months were judged for their health. In 1908, social activist Mary de Garmo established and held the first better babies contest at the Louisiana State Fair in Shreveport, Louisiana. The contests, mirroring theories established in the US’s eugenics movement of the twentieth century, aimed to establish standards for judging infant health. Nurses and physicians judged infants participating in the contest on mental health, physical health, and physical appearance. In 1913, the Woman’s Home Companion (WHC) magazine cosponsored de Garmo’s better babies contests and introduced the competition to state fairs throughout the US. Better babies contests helped promote routine health assessments of children by medical professionals.
On 30 June 1980, in a five to four decision, the US Supreme Court ruled in the Case Harris v. McRae that the Hyde Amendment of 1976 did not violate the US Constitution. The Hyde Amendment banned the use of federal funding to pay for any abortion services. The US Supreme Court's decision in Harris v. McRae overturned the decision of McRae v. Califano (1980), in which the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York had ruled that the funding restrictions established by the Hyde Amendment violated the US Constitution. After the US Supreme Court's ruling in Harris v. McRae, the Hyde Amendment continued to prohibit federal Medicaid funding for abortion services, limiting the funds available for low-income women seeking abortions.
In the 2012 case Texas Medical Providers Performing Abortion Services v. David Lakey, a US appeals court ruled as constitutional a Texas law that required abortion providers in the state to show women receiving abortions the ultrasound images of their fetuses. The law also required providers to describe the sounds of the fetuses' nascent hearts. In doing so, the court set precedent that ultrasound readings are necessary medical information for pregnant women seeking abortions, increasing the wait-period for women seeking abortions. The decision fueled debates in the early twenty-first century US abouts women's rights to abortions.
In 1976, the US Congress passed the Hyde Amendment, which banned the use of federal funding to pay for abortions through Medicaid. In 1976, Illinois Congressman Henry J. Hyde proposed the amendment to the Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare, Appropriation Act of 1977. In 1980, the US Supreme Court in Harris v. McRae (1980) upheld the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment. Included annually in every Congressional appropriation act after the one passed in 1976, amended versions of the Hyde Amendment have restricted federal funding of abortion services for women participating in Medicaid.