More stories

  • in

    ‘Outraged, sickened, terrified’: Guardian readers on the Texas abortion ban

    Texas‘Outraged, sickened, terrified’: Guardian readers on the Texas abortion banNine Guardian readers share their thoughts on the ruling that bans most abortions – and what it means for reproductive rights Guardian readers and Rachel ObordoSat 4 Sep 2021 06.00 EDTLast modified on Sat 4 Sep 2021 06.01 EDTThe US supreme court voted 5-4 to allow a Texas law banning most abortions to remain in force. The law prohibits abortions once medical professionals can detect cardiac activity, usually around six weeks and before most women know they’re pregnant.Nine people share their reaction to the ruling and what they think it means for women’s rights.‘Women’s rights are being stolen out from under us’We have all these yahoos down here screaming about their rights being taken away (guns, vaccines and maskless), but women’s rights are being stolen out from under us. Abortion should not be a political decision – it is a moral decision. No one has the right to tell me what I can do with my body. One day “I” will answer to my Lord, no one else will stand in place during my judgment day. It is very disheartening. Women’s rights are slowly being taken away. What will they take away next? Michelle, 52, Texas‘How can I still be afraid of my voice not mattering?’It’s absolutely not right to have control over a woman’s body like this. I had one abortion when I was 22. My now husband and I had just started dating and we weren’t financially or emotionally ready to have children. If we were not allowed to have an abortion then, our relationship would not have survived. I would have been a single mother, trying to support a baby I wasn’t ready for and didn’t want. How do you think that child would have been raised? We now have two children and we are able to support them with love and everything they need to thrive. To this day my husband and I do not regret the extremely hard choice we had to make. We were both grieving for a while but, it was the right decision and it was my body, my choice.I had to have two C-sections with both of my sons as they were too large for me to give birth naturally. During my last C-section, I chose to get sterilized and my tubes tied. This was a difficult choice, but it was my choice for a healthy life. I decided for myself that day so no one could for me another day. I live in the USA, it’s 2021, how can I still be afraid of my voice not mattering? Kelsi, 30, Arizona‘This law is deeply and blatantly misogynistic’Saying I’m appalled does not begin to cover it. I am speechless. I just want to emphasize what others have been saying: there are no laws dictating what men can do with their bodies. For there to be full equality under the law, there can be no laws dictating what a woman can do with hers. I will be boycotting Texas in every way I can. The unintended consequences of this law will be deadlier and more horrific than the unintended consequences of Prohibition. This law is deeply and blatantly misogynistic. All women everywhere should be protesting in the streets. Valerie, 69, New York‘I spent my life fighting for abortion rights and now I feel defeated’I am outraged, sickened and terrified. I spent my life fighting for abortion rights, and now I just feel defeated. I’d leave this sick and evil country if I could, but I’m too old and too poor to be able to get out. I’ll stay and battle on, but the future looks increasingly bleak and dark.I fear for the lives and health of Texas women, and for the future of anyone in America who is not a white, straight, Christian, rightwing male. I am absolutely horrified and feel like a lifetime’s worth of work by so many people just went up in smoke. American women are in grave danger, and not just in Texas. Linda, 71, Maryland‘This is not the country I fought for’This is Handmaid’s Tale stuff. When I was young, I was a Goldwater Republican, but I left the party after Newt Gingrich was elected speaker. They [the Republicans] see Trump as America’s Viktor Orbán, running a “soft” dictatorship. The abortion ruling is one more step in their plan to eliminate freedom. Their stance on gun control is to ensure that their followers will be armed to the teeth the next time they try to pull off an insurrection. As a retired disabled veteran of the Vietnam war, this is not the country I fought for. Back in 1968 it was a different country – Republicans were the good guys – I’m not sure I want to keep living here if this is the way things are going. Bill, 74, Georgia‘The burden will be on the lower socioeconomic people’An absolute outrage. How dare a white male majority make choices about our bodies? I had two negative pregnancy tests when pregnant with my daughter, and didn’t get confirmation until I was 16 weeks pregnant. I am a social worker and know there are thousands of children who are languishing in the foster care system and will never be adopted. Who will care for these unwanted children? The burden, as usual in the USA, will be on the lower socioeconomic people. We are going backwards and it is beyond distressing. The wealthy will have access to abortions and other women will be forced to carry and bear children they don’t want or can’t support financially or emotionally. What a travesty. Allison, 50, Utah‘I think the ban starts six weeks too late’I am thrilled, though I think the ban starts six weeks too late. I’m hopeful that the supreme court will at least acknowledge a state’s options to set its own standards here. My concerns are that so much of our country is comfortable with the murder of the most innocent lives among us. It’s hard to get anything right as a society when infanticide is acceptable. Michael, Kansas‘Welcome back to the dark ages’This is utterly disgusting and abhorrent. Women of all ages should and must be able to make their own choice concerning their body. Welcome back to the dark ages. It’s OK to be against abortion but you don’t get to choose for others – it’s a matter of personal choice. I went through an abortion in my late 20s when I was living in Asia. My then boyfriend was immature and stupid and so was I. Anyway, it was a traumatic experience for many reasons and I wouldn’t go through it again, but that was my choice and I’m glad I had the option. Gally, 40, California‘Saying it’s too complicated is such a lazy response’It’s cowardice supreme. Such a twisted law – pitting people against each other. The supreme court can’t even give a good reason for blocking it other than that it’s too complicated. That is such a lazy response. It’s a sad day for women. I can only imagine what other countries think of this. I worry that other states will take approaches like this and effectively ban abortion elsewhere too. Jeremy, 24, MinnesotaTopicsTexasAbortionUS politicsHealthfeaturesReuse this content More

  • in

    Allowing mass infection of children is ‘reckless’, experts warn

    Allowing mass infection of children is “reckless” and all over-12s should be offered a coronavirus vaccine, a group of scientists has warned.Experts from across the globe, alongside parents, carers and educational staff, have written to education secretary Gavin Williamsonto raise their concerns about the impact of the pandemic on education.They argue policies in England mean there will soon be a large population “susceptible” to the virus mixing in crowded spaces with “hardly any mitigations”.Earlier school reopenings in Scotland and the US have shown a lack of “adequate mitigations” is likely to lead to the virus spreading among children, which could further disrupt learning with significant absences due to student and staff illness, they said.In an open letter published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), they warn: “England’s policies mean that we will soon have a large susceptible population with high prevalence of infection mixing in crowded environments with hardly any mitigations.”They said children have suffered “significant harms” in the pandemic, including from long Covid, adding: “Allowing mass infection of children is therefore reckless.”Research led by University College London and Public Health England and published this week found as many as one in seven children who get coronavirus could have symptoms almost four months later.People who tested positive were twice as likely to report three or more symptoms 15 weeks later than those who tested negative, the study suggested.But lead author Professor Sir Terence Stephenson said he felt “reassured” by the data, which he believes shows it is “nowhere near what people thought in the worst-case scenario”.The group behind the letter to Mr Williamson called for vaccines to be offered “to all 12 to 15-year-olds, with rollout in schools to maximise access and uptake”.They also called for rules on face coverings for secondary school students and staff in classrooms and for bubbles to be reinstated, as well as more investment in building ventilation.The signatories included scientists from UK, US, Germany, India and Norway.Members of Independent Sage, the Parent SafeEdForAll group and the National Education Union were among those who added their names to the list.The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is yet to give a recommendation on extending the jabs rollout to all healthy 12 to 15-year-olds.Mr Williamson said this week he hoped a decision would be made “very, very soon”, and indicated his support for a widening of the programme by saying a lot of people “very much hope that we’re in a position of being able to roll out vaccinations for those who are under the age of 16”.Additional reporting by Press Association More

  • in

    The Guardian view on the Texas abortion ban: this is not the end | Editorial

    OpinionAbortionThe Guardian view on the Texas abortion ban: this is not the endEditorialThe supreme court’s refusal to block the law marks a grave blow to the freedom and safety of women Thu 2 Sep 2021 13.45 EDTLast modified on Thu 2 Sep 2021 14.31 EDTThe cruel, vindictive and dangerous law that has taken effect in Texas is much more than the most extreme anti-abortion legislation in the United States. To many, it understandably feels like the beginning of the end – denying women the rights enjoyed under the landmark Roe v Wade ruling, which established that abortion is legal before the foetus is viable outside the womb, at around 24 weeks. It will further embolden the religious right. Though polling suggests the majority of Americans believe that terminations should be legal in most or all cases, this is already the worst ever legislative year for restrictions.But it is better understood as the end of the beginning. The right to abortion has, in practice, been systematically dismantled through methods ranging from intimidation to cynical regulation. This moment is the culmination of the first stage in a decades-long war on the rights of women, made possible by Donald Trump’s appointment of judges known to support restricting reproductive rights. A divided supreme court refused to block the legislation while the legal battle over it plays out.This is a near-total abortion ban, with an exemption only for medical emergencies. The six-week limit in practice applies not from fertilisation, but from six weeks after a woman’s last period, used by doctors to date pregnancies – when most women will not even know they are pregnant. Up to 90% of the state’s procedures happened after that time. International evidence, and America’s own past, testifies that it will not stop abortions. It will push them underground, endangering women’s health and lives. It is an attack on the rights of all women, but above all will punish those who are poor and black, who already struggled to access services and will not be able to travel outside the state easily. It will hurt women who want to control their own bodies, including survivors of incest, rape and abuse. Many states have enacted similar laws, which have been blocked. But this one is especially egregious. It has used the architecture of the state to promote the rule of the mob. It prohibits officials from enforcing it, instead deputising ordinary citizens to sue anyone for suspected violations. While designed this way to make legal challenges harder, it is part of the broader turn of Trump Republicans towards vigilantism and away from democratic institutions. By promising a $10,000 bounty to anyone who sues successfully, it encourages the greedy as well as vindictive ex-partners and zealots to act. Not only abortion providers, but anyone who “aids and abets” an abortion is liable; it appears that even someone who drives a woman to a clinic could be targeted. There is no redress against malicious suits, even in cases where the plaintiff has a past history of similar claims. The result is that doctors and providers who comply with the law can still be put out of business by vexatious claims.Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s blistering dissent attacked the supreme court’s inaction in the face of “a breathtaking act of defiance – of the constitution, of this court’s precedents and of rights of women seeking abortions throughout Texas”. But she is in the minority as the court prepares to rule on a separate case – Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks – which anti-abortion activists see as a chance to overturn Roe v Wade. If that happens, bans will automatically come into force under trigger statutes enacted by multiple states. Others would be able to enforce pre-Roe v Wade bans that remain on their books.This law, like the wider anti-abortion drive, hurts women’s freedom, their health and even their lives. It has been achieved through the relentless efforts of activists who are not merely egging on but also funding others around the world. Meeting and defeating these challenges will require an equally committed, comprehensive and ambitious campaign. The opponents of women’s freedom will not stop. Defenders cannot either. This law will galvanise them.TopicsAbortionOpinionWomenUS supreme courtHealthRepublicansUS politicsLaw (US)editorialsReuse this content More

  • in

    NHS fears ‘mass exodus’ of staff as mental health absences soar in 2021

    NHS leaders and experts have warned that the health service is facing a “mass exodus” of staff in the year ahead unless exhausted doctors and nurses struggle are given more support.It comes as the latest figures show that mental health absences among NHS staff have soared during the spring and early summer – as a growing number suffer from burnout.There were 13,000 NHS staff off work because of mental health issues in May – a 55 per cent increase on the previous year, according to FirstCare, which monitors absences in the health service. There were another 13,000 absences mental health absences in June – up 42 per cent on last year.“From April onwards we’ve seen a significant rise in mental health cases, and it shows no sign of stopping,” Steve Carter, director of consulting services at FirstCare, told a panel of MPs and peers on Tuesday. “We need to address the mental health issue quickly if we are to get through the winter.”Professor Stephanie Snow – co-author of the NHS Voices of Covid-19 project, which asks staff how they are coping during the pandemic – said many were struggling under the strain of ongoing Covid cases and the backlog of treatments for other illnesses.Prof Snow told MPs and peers on the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Coronavirus that many doctors and nurses are worried about their colleagues quitting in the months ahead.“They’re worried about losing more colleagues,” she said. “There is a real sense of fear about a mass exodus of health professionals leaving because of their own ill health – many say they simply can’t face working in the health service anymore.”Prof Snow said staff were under huge pressure to help get the health service back to normal, while dealing with the “trauma” they experienced the Covid and underlying problems with workforce shortages.“We’re seeing high levels of burnout, high levels of stress, and it’s starting to manifest into physical symptoms,” said Dr Rachel Sumner, co-author of the Covid-19 Heroes study on the impact of the pandemic on frontline workers.Dr Sumner added: “Many [NHS staff] are considering leaving – and that would be a true tragedy. Most of them won’t leave during the pandemic because they feel it’s their duty. But this is only going to get worse unless there’s significant work done to sort out the problems. If we don’t look after them, disaster will come.”A survey of Royal College of Nursing members last month revealed that 36 per cent were thinking of leaving the profession – up from 27 per cent last year.Factors cited include the way nursing staff have been treated during the Covid pandemic (44 per cent), low staffing levels (43 per cent), and lack of management support (42 per cent).A British Medical Association survey in May found just over a fifth (21 per cent) of doctors working in the health service said they might leave within the next year.Dr Katherine Henderson, president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, told MPs and peers she was worried the most experienced staff in the NHS will leave “sooner than they should” because of current pressures and lack of support.“Older staff are going to bail out and retire early unless the things they’ve been banging on about are actually addressed. There needs to be a serious look at retention … I’m genuinely not confident there is a plan.”Rising patient numbers are placing further strain on the NHS, with major hospitals issuing a “black alert” – an emergency warning they are under sever pressure – over bed shortages in recent weeks.Two major London hospitals told The Independent earlier this month that they had declared “black alert” incidents due to bed shortages, as well as rising numbers of people turning up in A&E.Hospitals across England have seen record levels of non-Covid patients turning up at A&E, with a lack of intensive care beds meaning routine surgeries, including for some cancer patients, have been cancelled across England. More

  • in

    'Get it today': Biden urges Americans to get Pfizer vaccine after FDA approval – video

    President Biden urged Americans to come forward to receive the Pfizer vaccine after it received FDA approval. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is trying to finish its licensing process for the drug as soon as Monday.
    The president spoke directly to Americans who have said they would wait to get vaccinated until one of the vaccines received full FDA approval. ‘It has now happened,’ Biden said. ‘The moment you’ve been waiting for is here. It’s time for you to go get your vaccination – and get it today’

    Full FDA approval of Pfizer Covid shot will enable vaccine requirements More

  • in

    Covid: ‘Harrowing’ rise in child deaths since coronavirus lockdowns

    Councils across England have called for more support after a “harrowing” rise in child deaths and serious cases of harm linked to abuse or neglect of children since the first Covid lockdown.The number of serious incidents involving children that were reported by authorities have risen by almost a fifth over the past year, according to the Local Government Association (LGA).There were 536 serious incident notifications in England between April 2020 and March 2021 – an increase of 19 per cent on the previous year.The LGA said the rise is a “huge cause for concern” and it is extremely concerned about children’s safety – with families under increased pressure during the past 18 months of the pandemic.Children’s services regulator Ofsted has previously warned that a “toxic mix” of poverty, isolation and mental illness had led to an alarming rise in infants being harmed during lockdown.Local authorities must notify the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel of the death or serious harm of a child in their area, if they know or suspect they have been abused or neglected.Councils are also required to inform the education secretary and Ofsted if a looked-after child dies, regardless of whether they suspect abuse or neglect.Local authorities reported 223 deaths and 284 instances of serious harm in the past year, while 29 incidents were categorised as “other”. More than a third (36 per cent) of the notifications related to children under one.Council leaders said there was an urgent need for more investment in children’s social care in the government’s forthcoming spending review.Councillor Anntoinette Bramble, chair of the LGA’s children and young people board, said: “Supporting and protecting vulnerable children is one of the most important roles played by councils … so this rise in serious incident notifications is particularly harrowing and a huge cause for concern.”The Labour councillor added: “The pandemic has put extra pressure on families, particularly those living in difficult circumstances, which can fuel harmful acts of abuse or neglect on children.”“Councils have been working hard with their partners to identify this and provide the help children need, but it is vital that children’s social care services are funded to meet this need.”Ofsted’s chief inspector Amanda Spielman warned last November that vulnerable infants were at greater risk of harm during the pandemic amid increased tension in families.She said a “toxic mix” of poverty, isolation and mental illness were behind the alarming rise in incidents disturbing 20 per cent rise in babies being killed or harmed in the months after the first lockdown.The LGA is calling for a new strategy across government departments to protect children’s safety. “It is only by working together that we can effectively safeguard our most vulnerable young people,” said Ms Bramble. More

  • in

    Labour attacks Javid over lack of clarity on NHS budget with just weeks to go

    Labour has written to ministers urging them to keep funding in place to help free up hospital beds and help the NHS cope with a crisis in patient demand.Shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth told health secretary Sajid Javid that the NHS needed urgent clarity on the money available to it from beyond the end of September.Specifically, his letter warned money was needed to keep in place an initiative started before the first Covid wave which saw patients discharged back into the community with the NHS paying for up to six weeks of care.This has been credited with releasing 30,000 NHS beds that were the available for Covid patients or for hospitals to use for patients waiting for surgery and other treatment.The government has only agreed a budget for the NHS until the end of September with negotiations between the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England and the Treasury ongoing.In his letter to Sajid Javid, Jonathan Ashworth said the health service needed “immediate certainty” adding: “The service is in a summer crisis, with huge numbers of people in need of urgent and emergency care, record calls to ambulance services, and a soaring waiting list.“With only 16 days to the beginning of September, it is incredible that the service still does not have the budgetary clarity it needs to make major decisions about service planning.”“In the first few days of your tenure as secretary of state, you said that you wanted to give the NHS what it needs to recover from the pandemic. The NHS will now be wondering why you have not made a decision on this budget. Patients and NHS staff will consider this a test of whether you are true to your word to them.”He said the discharge to assess programme had been praised by the new NHS England chief executive Amanda Pritchard as well as NHS England’s director of strategy Ian Dodge.Mr Ashworth added: “Given the lack of any decision on extension of the funding, it is not clear whether your department or this Government are listening. NHS Providers and NHS Confederation had called for a decision to be made on this by mid-August. Regrettably, that deadline has now passed. This indecision and lack of clarity cannot be allowed to continue further.”His comments come as the latest NHS data shows a total waiting list of 5.5 million people, with 304,000 waiting over a year for treatment. More than one million 999 calls were made to ambulance trusts in July – the highest ever number ever recorded.Mr Ashworth challenged the health secretary over what assessment the DHSC had made of the impact of the discharge to assess funding and whether the government accepted the view of NHS England’s Ian Dodge that continuing the scheme would be vital to the NHS recovering its backlog of operations.While negotiations over NHS England’s budget continue, the Health Service Journal, has reported NHS trusts have been told to plan on the basis of needing to make 1.5 per cent cost savings for the rest of the year.Before the coronavirus crisis NHS England had signed hospitals up to a target of 1.1 per cent savings.Sally Gainsbury, senior policy analyst at the Nuffield Trust, told the HSJ: “We would warn the NHS against agreeing to what would be yet another settlement which assumes huge and unachievable levels of efficiency.“There’s covid, but you also just have to look at the NHS financial performance in recent years to see this is an unrealistic target.”The Department of Health and Social Care were approached for comment. More