“It was just too perfect,” said her mother, Shenelle Ball-Green, of those calm, hot weeks.

Then, early on July 5, four days shy of her scheduled cesarean section, Ball-Stribling began experiencing complications from preeclampsia, a potentially life-threatening blood pressure disorder. Speeding up to 110 mph, her husband drove her to the nearest hospital 25 miles away from their home in Belzoni, a Mississippi Delta town of about 1,900 people.

Minutes before reaching the facility, Ball-Stribling suffered a seizure in the passenger seat. Her husband pulled her from the car and performed CPR on the side of the road. It was too late. She and the couple’s unborn daughter, Harper, died on the side of U.S. Route 49.

The tragedy might have had a different outcome if the hospital in Belzoni, a five-minute drive from Ball-Stribling’s home, hadn’t closed 13 years ago. Today, Humphreys County has no hospital, no emergency room, no urgent care clinic, and no county health department. It is one of more than in the U.S. that have fully closed since 2005.

In Belzoni, self-proclaimed “The Heart of the Delta,” and its surrounding area, communities are close-knit, and Harmony’s story is well known. Now, her death has galvanized local and state leaders determined to bring a hospital back to the county that has suffered without one.

“It was a tremendous eye-opener for this community,” said state Rep. Timaka James-Jones, a Democrat who represents the district that includes Belzoni and is Ball-Stribling’s aunt. “It brought to light how we are so without.”

Poverty often shapes the health disparities Humphreys County residents experience. Approximately under age 65 lack health insurance coverage, compared with about 1 in 11 people nationwide. Humphreys County also has the of any Mississippi county, reflecting the economic challenges many residents face. These disparities are evident in the county’s infant mortality rate, which is at roughly 15 deaths for every 1,000 births.

James-Jones has watched these circumstances influence the lives — and deaths — of her loved ones. She said she wants to see a hospital reestablished before her four-year term is up in early 2028.

But that may be easier said than done. In Belzoni, local leaders hoping to restore healthcare services face a tangled web of policy challenges that are especially demanding for a small town with limited resources. Its story reflects what many : Once a rural community loses a hospital, bringing it back can be nearly impossible.

Humphreys County’s Healthcare Losses

Humphreys County Memorial Hospital opened in Belzoni in 1951 as part of a nationwide hospital building boom fueled by a Truman-era law called the Hill-Burton Act. The legislation provided billions of dollars in grants and loans to build and modernize healthcare facilities. At the time, had no hospital. When the building boom began to subside by 1970, in Mississippi had at least one hospital.

But by the 2000s, many rural hospitals in the U.S. confronted financial difficulties. Low patient volumes, an increase in outpatient care, and meager revenues left many on precarious footing. Many had high rates of uninsured patients or those covered through government programs such as Medicaid, which typically reimburse providers at lower rates than commercial insurers.

Humphreys County’s hospital was among those struggling facilities. It was burdened with , and county officials sold it in 2008 to a private company. It was renamed the Patients’ Choice Medical Center. The hospital shut down five years later after Ray Shoemaker, the company’s CEO, was convicted on healthcare fraud charges related to another hospital he owned.

“I do hope they reopen,” Shoemaker wrote in a recent text message to Mississippi Today. “The community needs a hospital.” He said he stepped down from the company before going to prison in 2012.

In 2017, the University of Mississippi Medical Center partnered with the county supervisors and U.S. Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Democrat whose district includes Humphreys County, to secure a from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to open an after-hours acute care clinic in Belzoni. The clinic shut down in 2020, and UMMC officials declined to say why.

G.A. Carmichael Family Health Center, a Canton-based federally qualified health center with five other locations in Mississippi, took it over but did not maintain the extended hours, again leaving Humphreys County residents without after-hours care. Other public health services in the county have closed outright. Three years ago, the county’s health department stopped providing clinical services, said Greg Flynn, a spokesperson for the Mississippi State Department of Health. The county department closed entirely last year, citing staffing shortages and low patient volumes.

In the years since the hospital closed, the county has lost a fourth of its population, falling to 7,000 people, . James-Jones said she does not believe the community can experience growth until healthcare services are reestablished.

“I don’t know how I can see us growing any other way,” she said.

‘Something’s Way Better Than Nothing’

Months after losing her daughter and unborn granddaughter, Ball-Green climbed the steps of the stately, tan, brick Humphreys County Courthouse to attend a crowded Board of Supervisors meeting.

She stood at the dais and urged the supervisors to reestablish emergency healthcare services in the county to protect other residents from the fates of her loved ones.

“I wanted to let them know at any given moment that could be your child, your mother,” she said. “We’re a small town. Everyone knows everyone.”

She remembered the disappointment she felt when the supervisors told her there was nothing they could do. But when the board’s makeup changed after the 2023 elections, she said, she saw these attitudes shift.

Among the newly elected officials was Reggie Pinkston, who is now the president of the board and previously worked as an EMT when the hospital was open. His own family has suffered the consequences of limited healthcare access. A cousin living in Louise, a town about 20 miles south of Belzoni in the county, had a stroke in 2021 and waited an hour for an ambulance to arrive. She died two days later.

Pinkston said witnessing residents’ delays in care has made expanding access to healthcare services one of his priorities.

“We’re losing too many people in our county because of lack of healthcare,” Pinkston said.

The board enlisted several consultants to develop a strategy for expanding healthcare access and identifying funding sources to support these efforts. In late 2025, Thompson secured for Humphreys County through the congressional Community Project Funding process, which allows lawmakers to request federal support for specific projects.

The funds will be used to expand services at G.A. Carmichael’s Belzoni location in a county-owned building on U.S. Route 49, Pinkston said. Expansion plans include extending its hours of operation overnight to 5 a.m., purchasing equipment, and a possible renovation of the facility. It could begin its expanded operations by September, said James Coleman Jr., the health center’s CEO.

Establishing an after-hours urgent care clinic is a starting point toward reestablishing emergency care services or a hospital, James-Jones said.

“Something’s way better than nothing,” she said.

‘Not for the Faint of Heart’

Despite that encouraging first step, Humphreys County faces steep obstacles to opening a hospital.

At the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, George Pink is a senior research fellow at the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research and tracks rural hospital closures across the U.S. He said he’s aware of only a few communities that have successfully reopened a hospital after it closed.

“I can count that on one hand,” said Pink, who knows of roughly five such examples.

Communities face significant hurdles to reestablishing a hospital, including securing financing for construction or renovation, recruiting qualified staff, and covering substantial operating expenses during the licensing process before the facility can treat patients and generate revenue, said Brock Slabach, the National Rural Health Association’s chief operations officer and a former rural hospital administrator in southwestern Mississippi.

“Reopening a hospital is not for the faint of heart,” Slabach said. “Once they close, it’s very difficult to reopen them.”

To finance a potential hospital project in Humphreys County, local and state leaders said they plan to seek funding through the Rural Health Transformation Program, a federal initiative that will distribute $50 billion to states over five years. The federal government allocated Mississippi in December for the program’s first year.

The program is meant to offset budget cuts passed into law last summer that could harm rural hospitals. Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act Medicaid spending by $911 billion over 10 years and increase the number of uninsured people by 10 million, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates. Mississippi hospitals are beginning in 2029, according to Cindy Bradshaw, executive director of the Mississippi Division of Medicaid.

But , the program’s funding cannot be used for construction or major building expansions. Officials said the county will instead consider applying for funds through the program to support the recruitment of healthcare professionals.

The federal Rural Emergency Hospital designation is another way rural communities can keep emergency and outpatient services. Hospitals in that program receive over $3 million annually from the federal government and a higher Medicare reimbursement rate, but they .

Research by Pink’s team shows that many hospitals that converted to the model, which was established in 2023, saw an .

But there’s a catch. To receive the designation, a hospital must have been open in 2020, making Humphreys County ineligible. Mississippi’s junior U.S. senator, Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith, introduced legislation in 2024 to to 2014, a threshold that would have still excluded Humphreys County.

James-Jones said county leaders have urged Hyde-Smith to amend the proposed legislation so Humphreys County could qualify. Hyde-Smith did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

For county leaders, the path to widening healthcare access means navigating a thicket of state and federal policies, funding streams, and regulatory hurdles.

Some recent state-level policy changes have created opportunities for healthcare expansion in Humphreys County. In March, Republican Gov. Tate Reeves exempting Humphreys County from Mississippi’s certificate of need requirements, which are meant to prevent unnecessary healthcare expansions.

The exemption could make the county more attractive to prospective healthcare providers. But the financial challenges that contributed to the closure of Patients’ Choice Medical Center in 2013 remain, and Mississippi lawmakers have continued to reject Medicaid expansion, limiting a potential source of reimbursement for rural hospitals and clinics.

Industry officials expect hospitals’ financial pressures to intensify as Medicaid funding cuts take effect. The latest challenge is predicting how these cuts will affect the bottom lines of these facilities and whether additional cuts will come in the future, said Richard Roberson, president and CEO of the Mississippi Hospital Association.

“If someone’s trying to run a business, they’ve got to be able to know what those numbers look like,” Roberson said. “And it’s really hard to try to project that out right now.”

‘Now I Understand’

For Ball-Green, giving in to these obstacles would be a disservice to the Humphreys County residents who face health emergencies similar to the one her daughter experienced.

It has been five years since the funeral, but Ball-Green remembers it clearly. The day was stormy, but attendees brightened the gathering by wearing yellow, Ball-Stribling’s favorite color.

As friends and family gathered to pay their respects, her mother thought back on a relative’s funeral four months earlier. At that service, Ball-Stribling sang the gospel classic You Are My Strength to a roomful of mourners.

“She was singing, and she looked at me,” Ball-Green said, describing a peaceful but eerie expression on her daughter’s face in that moment — a sign of something to come, though she didn’t yet know what. “She turned around, and it was just that look, you know?”

Months later, as she sat at her daughter’s funeral, she began to interpret the foreboding glance differently. She came to believe it was a sign that Ball-Stribling’s gift for helping others by sharing her story would not end with her death.

That purpose had taken shape years earlier in her work as a teacher and continued as she shared about her fertility struggles and IVF journey in the final months of her life. Ball-Green said the community became deeply invested in her and Harper’s story.

In the years since, this gift has endured, she said. Ball-Stribling’s story has continued to resonate throughout Humphreys County, serving as a reminder of what residents stand to lose if they do not reopen the hospital.

“I think back on when she looked back at me,” Ball-Green said. “Now I understand.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Can’t see the audio player? Visit kffhealthnews.org to listen.

When Gov. Gavin Newsom, using his , refused to extradite a physician accused of prescribing and mailing abortion pills to a Louisiana woman, he said California would “not ever” allow “extremist politicians” to punish its doctors.

Newsom, who is considering a run for president, has long championed reproductive rights, but state lawmakers in the Democratically controlled California legislature know future governors might not have the same political beliefs.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host endorsed by President Donald Trump, has vowed to honor these types of extradition requests from other states if he’s elected, Louisiana “is trying to uphold what its people voted for, and California is undermining it.” His opponent, Democrat Xavier Becerra, has said he would deny the requests.

Legislation advancing in Sacramento is the latest chapter in a tit for tat that’s been happening between conservative and liberal states since 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, ending federal legal protections for abortion.

by state Assembly member Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, which is being heard in committee, would take some decisions out of the governor’s hands, requiring governors to deny extradition requests for healthcare providers who prescribe abortion medication or administer gender-affirming care. It would also shield anyone in California who helped patients travel to California or another state to receive legal care. While opponents cast “shield laws” as an incursion on other states’ authority, supporters of the bill view it as insurance — even with Becerra leading Hilton 52% to 31%, according to by the University of California-Berkeley Institute of Government Studies.

Newsom spokesperson Marissa Saldivar said the governor doesn’t comment on pending legislation. Hilton and Becerra didn’t return calls for comment.

“Protecting providers from prosecution should not rely on shifting political winds or a single person’s decision,” said Alyssa Sherer, a nurse practitioner who spoke in support of the bill at a Senate committee hearing in June. Sherer is also the medical director at Hey Jane, a telehealth medication abortion provider. 

Thirteen states have banned abortion outright, and 28 other states ban abortion somewhere between six weeks and viability. At the same time, other states that allow abortion have enacted shield laws to protect doctors and nurses from liability when they prescribe across state lines.

People living in states with total abortion bans are increasingly getting abortion pills prescribed via telehealth, from 74,000 abortions in 2024 to 92,000 abortions in 2025, according to the Guttmacher Institute, citing numbers from its Monthly Abortion Provision Study.

Critics of shield laws say that states have a legitimate interest in enforcing their own statutes and that such laws represent an attempt by some states, like California, to nullify the legal decisions of others.

“If California says, ‘We’re not going to honor any other state’s laws. We’re going to ship abortion pills into your states. You can’t have a law that says abortion is illegal,’ I don’t know — that doesn’t seem like a workable situation,” said Greg Burt, who is vice president of the California Family Council and has spoken in opposition to shield laws at the State Capitol.

Twenty-one other states and Washington, D.C., have similar shield laws, but Arizona, California, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania’s rely on an executive order, which could be reversed by a successor, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Amanda Barrow, a senior staff attorney at the Center on Reproductive Health, Law, and Policy at UCLA Law, said passing extradition protections would put California on firmer footing, because an executive order “could be revoked by a governor who is anti-abortion or anti-gender-affirming-care.”

Hilton has said he would do just that if elected.

“Just as I wouldn’t want to see Louisiana coming in and undermining something that we voted for here in California,” the GOP candidate told KQED in January. 

During a , Becerra said he was strident about protecting reproductive rights as the state’s attorney general. “Absolutely no,” Becerra said of allowing California physicians to be extradited. 

This year, Hawai‘i to its existing shield laws. And Oregon , including banning law enforcement from cooperating with out-of-state or federal investigations into care that’s legal in the state.

But Republican legislators in conservative states have cast telehealth visits as an end run around their laws. And some have moved to restrict abortion pill access.

The governors of , , and have signed bills this year that criminalize the sale, purchase, or distribution of medication that induces an abortion. Those states make it a felony to provide medication abortion drugs to people who are seeking to end a pregnancy. The laws impose up to 10 years in prison with potentially tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

Mississippi amended the state’s controlled substances code to add abortion pills as a criminal category. Although the state already prohibits abortion broadly, the measure specifically addresses distribution, which could subject out-of-state providers to prosecution.

In January, Louisiana a California doctor, Remy Coeytaux, mailing abortion pills to a patient. Newsom denied the request. Likewise, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul denied Louisiana’s February 2025 extradition request for a .

Texas has taken a slightly different legal tact. Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican running for the U.S. Senate, obtained a default judgment of more than $100,000 against the New York doctor targeted by Louisiana, but a , citing New York’s shield law. Neither Paxton nor Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill responded to requests for comment. 

Fear of being charged with a crime for providing quality medical care is contributing to physicians leaving medicine, said Sacramento emergency room doctor Kamara Graham, who is vice president of the California chapter of the American College of Emergency Physicians, which is supporting the bill.

“It’s really conflicting and hard for us to weigh that concern of: Will I get extradited and charged and potentially be taken away from my family? Or do I do the right thing for my patient?” Graham said.

The availability of medication used in most abortions could soon change nationwide. Under the leadership of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Food and Drug Administration it is conducting a safety review of mifepristone, one of two medications in pill form that is used in most U.S. abortions. The FDA maintains the drug is safe and effective.

If the FDA were to decide that mifepristone is not safe, such a ruling would supersede state laws, even in states where abortion is legal. If mifepristone is restricted, many telehealth groups have said they would switch to using only the other medication, misoprostol.

“The elephant in the room is whether the Trump administration, particularly after the midterms, makes some kind of move to put national limits on access to abortions,” said Mary Ziegler, a law professor at UC-Davis who has written several books on reproductive health law.

“Not everything is something that the legislature can solve for,” Ziegler said, “because there’s some uncertainty about how the federal courts are going to react to all of this.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

Researchers this spring discovered in water in several coastal locations across New York’s Long Island, and town officials in the Hamptons vacation destination about the findings. in Florida have been infected this year, and in June urged people to take precautions.

About 1 in 5 people infected by the bacteria die, sometimes within a day or two of becoming ill, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention . The bacteria, Vibrio vulnificus, can enter open wounds and cause tissue death and systemic sepsis.

“Many people with Vibrio vulnificus infection can get seriously ill and need intensive care or limb amputation,” the CDC says.

The risk of such public threats is mounting because climate change is expanding the territory of certain pathogens, but researchers say there’s another concern. The Trump administration has cut investments in programs and agencies that prevent, track, and respond to health hazards the federal government is now confronting.

Consider the , which can infest and kill livestock, in the U.S. in June. The U.S. Department of Agriculture lost in the first six months of 2025, according to a report from the USDA’s Office of Inspector General, and the agency’s winnowed-down inspection service is helping lead the response to the parasite.

Or malaria. A freeze on foreign aid disrupted international malaria prevention efforts, and warned that the U.S. is vulnerable to the reintroduction of the infectious disease.

And when it comes to Vibrio, the Trump administration began removing hundreds of deep-sea instruments that and yield data that helps that can allow the bacteria to flourish. the data to study Vibrio, which can when water temperatures and .

“It is important to track coastal temperatures, and that will relate to the distributions of Vibrio,” said Christopher Gobler, a professor in the School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences at New York’s Stony Brook University, though he added that there are also other sources of data for researchers.

The Trump administration to dismantle the ocean monitoring system following bipartisan opposition to the effort in Congress.

But it’s still curtailing Vibrio surveillance. The life-threatening species that’s found in water can also sicken or kill people who eat contaminated seafood, such as infected with the bacteria. And infections from Vibrio vulnificus linked to consuming raw or undercooked shellfish as the presence of other pathogens in food decrease.

Since 1995, 10 states have participated in a federal program called the Foodborne Disease Active Disease Surveillance Network, or FoodNet. The program, with the CDC, monitors and track cases of foodborne illness caused by eight specific pathogens, including Vibrio. But last year the Trump administration to report on all but two pathogens, which means states no longer must report cases to the CDC.

Federal officials deny the moves are putting Americans at risk, saying the CDC continues to monitor these pathogens through other national surveillance systems to ensure ongoing visibility into disease trends and outbreaks.

Meanwhile, some former health leaders say the ramifications of sweeping cuts to health agencies and global prevention programs are becoming more apparent, undermining U.S. response efforts and initiatives that aim to safeguard the country from diseases.

“We are letting down defenses that were necessary to protect against microbial threats,” said Tom Frieden, a former CDC director who is now president and chief executive of Resolve to Save Lives, which works to stop preventable disease. “Instead of protecting, we’re doing the opposite.”

Do Limited Resources Mean Higher Risks?

The administration defends its actions, including massive layoffs at government health agencies, as necessary to eliminate wasteful spending.

The Department of Health and Human Services “is advancing the most significant public health reforms in a generation focused on prevention, accountability, scientific transparency, and better health outcomes,” agency spokesperson Emily Hilliard said in an email. “The Department is putting American families at the center of public health decision-making.”

Evidence suggests health risks are rising even as the Trump administration pulls back on resources for research, detection, and response.

Early in his administration, President Donald Trump opted to freeze and review work on global health programs. Trump’s cost-reduction effort, led by billionaire Elon Musk, also dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development.

As a result, work was disrupted on the President’s Malaria Initiative, a George W. Bush-era program aimed at combating malaria in hard-hit countries that is credited with saving more than . USAID had in the program since 2005.

In addition, for global malaria programs were targeted for termination, , an independent research group that includes Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. The report didn’t include data on the total value of those specific malaria grants.

And the spending freeze halted research for more effective . The administration dissolved the CDC’s , shuffling staffers to other divisions and on the disease. HHS didn’t respond to an email asking how many staff members had been moved.

The life-threatening infectious disease spread by mosquitos was in 1951. But the CDC’s updated guidance on investigating domestic cases that “the country remains susceptible to malaria reintroduction.”

resulted in 10 people in Arkansas, Florida, Maryland, and Texas becoming infected locally, and mosquitoes capable of transmitting malaria are found throughout most of the country.

“The majority of U.S. residents lack protective immunity against malaria, rendering persons susceptible to severe illness and death if infected,” the CDC said in the May report.

HHS declined to comment on any of the specific cuts but said the CDC works with domestic and international partners to reduce the burden of malaria and prevent its reestablishment in the U.S.

It’s not just cuts to funding that are raising health risks, say researchers and former health officials. Significant staffing cuts mean there are fewer people working on preventing or tracking diseases, they say.

“Yes, the programs have been cut in terms of reduction in staff, but I would say, equally important, you have reductions in expertise,” said Jeanne Marrazzo, CEO of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. “It’s irreplaceable.”

Screwworm is a species of parasitic blowfly producing larvae that can enter open wounds and devour tissue, infecting people and animals. Like malaria, it has long been eliminated in the U.S., and disease monitoring efforts have been key to keeping it out.

The cuts at USAID stripped from the United Nations’ , which focuses on global food security and the such as screwworm.

In the wake of the administration’s cost-cutting initiatives, more than 20,000 employees are gone from the USDA, which develops and implements agriculture policy and provides resources to producers of livestock vulnerable to the parasite.

On June 3, the first new case of screwworm in the U.S. was confirmed, and there have now been infected with parasite. An expanding outbreak could devastate the cattle industry.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins during the Trump administration have led to screwworm’s return. Instead, she has , saying it didn’t do enough to prevent reintroduction into the U.S. Rollins said on X that “” under the previous Biden administration was partly to blame, providing no evidence.

The USDA did not respond to an email seeking comment.

Ashish Jha, a doctor who served as the White House covid response coordinator during the Biden administration, said there’s no truth to the claim that immigrants lacking legal status have brought screwworm into the U.S.

Investments in tracking and combating diseases have suffered, he said, because HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is prioritizing the prevention of chronic disease at the expense of efforts to curtail infectious disease.

“Who doesn’t want a healthier country? It sounds great, but it’s kind of a bait and switch,” Jha said. “They’re doing the opposite. They’re letting down our defenses that are necessary to protect us against microbial threats.”

HHS’ Hilliard disagreed, saying Kennedy’s actions are making the agency more effective.

“Secretary Kennedy is delivering that reform by streamlining operations, reducing redundancies, and returning HHS to pre-pandemic staffing levels,” she said. “At the same time, he is dismantling policies and incentives that contributed to a nationwide chronic disease epidemic.”

Surveillance Gaps

Jha pointed to Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the World Health Organization, which coordinates global responses to public health issues and crises, and to the dismantling of USAID.

The pullback has had implications for the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo, aid workers say.

Without the same amount of funding from USAID, the International Rescue Committee, which partners to deliver front-line health, surveillance, and outbreak preparedness activities in Congo, .

“Funding cuts have left the region dangerously exposed,” Heather Reoch Kerr, IRC’s country director for Congo, said .

The outbreak is roughly 7,000 miles away, but its spread has the , with stepped-up surveillance and entry restrictions on airline travelers. Federal officials have said that the dismantling of USAID hasn’t hampered detection or response.

“The U.S. government continues to move aggressively to contain the Ebola outbreak at its source in order to protect the American people and prevent further international spread,” the State Department said .

Trump’s decision to disengage with the WHO was criticized by following a hantavirus outbreak this spring on a cruise ship that had set sail from Argentina. the , and they questioned why the president suggested creating a costly new rather than sticking with the WHO — especially, they say, when the U.S. is cutting back on the surveillance programs it already has.

The federal government has tracked Vibrio cases as part of the FoodNet program, which aims in part to identify and curtail outbreaks. Reporting on cases of Vibrio is now optional.

Close to half of the cases of foodborne illness caused by Vibrio vulnificus have , and some within 24 hours after consumption of tainted shellfish such as raw oysters. The bacteria can multiply rapidly, leading to septic shock and blistering skin lesions. The pathogen is becoming to antibiotics.

The CDC estimates that of Vibrio infection occur annually, with infections from the most severe species, Vibrio vulnificus, steadily rising. , that species has led to 429 cases due to infections of open wounds and 135 cases from contaminated food.

“The more surveillance you get, you can connect the dots,” said Bill Marler, a Seattle-area food safety lawyer. “If a tree falls in the woods and you don’t hear it, did the tree fall? It’s easier not to report diseases. Then they can say, ‘Look at how safe our food supply is.’”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

The certified professional midwife pressed the button on a handheld Doppler ultrasound machine she placed on Collins’ belly. “That’s her heartbeat,” she said to Collins’ 3-year-old daughter, who sat beside her mom as a whooshing sound filled the room. “I think Mommy’s baby’s right here.”

The midwife is not licensed as a nurse. In Georgia, that makes what she’s doing illegal. Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News agreed not to identify her by name.

Georgia is one of seven states where delivering babies can earn non-nurse midwives, at minimum, a cease-and-desist letter requiring them to end their careers. In North Carolina, it’s a . In New York, .

Meanwhile, demand for their services is increasing. Intended home births rose by 42% nationally from 2020 to 2024, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, and those births are often overseen by certified professional midwives. In Georgia, they rose by 72%. Midwives who assist with home births typically see clients from prenatal appointments through after childbirth, providing more postpartum checkups than most new mothers receive.

Home births make up nationwide. In the eight states where they were most common in 2024 — Hawai‘i, Idaho, Montana, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming— they made up 3-5% of births.

As that number rises, midwifery advocates said, regulating the practice with licenses would allow home births to be safer. Free birth — without the help of a skilled professional before or after labor — can be .

“People are going to keep having their babies at home, and they deserve a trained provider,” said Missi Burgess, president of the Georgia chapter of the National Association of Certified Professional Midwives.

For decades, professional midwives have been advocating for laws to legalize and regulate their profession. More lawmakers have supported those efforts in the past 15 years, with 36 states and Washington, D.C., allowing them to get licensed to deliver babies. Last year, a wave of state lawmakers — in Georgia, Mississippi, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia — tried to add their states to the list, although none of their bills has become law.

Certified professional midwives deliver babies in homes or birth centers. Rather than attend nursing school — which many can’t afford — they earn a nationally recognized certificate by attending at least 55 births and demonstrating their knowledge. Nurse-midwives more often deliver babies in hospitals or clinics than in patients’ homes.

Some hospitals and doctors oppose midwife licensing proposals without certain guardrails. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists showing that infants are twice as likely to die during planned births at home or in birth centers as in hospitals, while acknowledging that the data remains limited. It doesn’t account for several factors, including who assisted in the birth.

Still, prominent stories of home births with midwives gone wrong contribute to the skepticism around licensing laws. In 2023, The Washington Post of a licensed midwife who pleaded guilty to felonies in Virginia after an infant death and assisted with home births in Maryland in which two more babies died.

In Mississippi, a bill that would have regulated and licensed professional midwives died after a state senator blocked a vote in the committee he chaired. Democratic Sen. Hob Bryan he didn’t “wish to encourage that activity.”

But midwives said they have a sympathetic ear now in the Trump administration, with its Make America Healthy Again movement. Cassaundra Jah, executive director of the , said she has been on calls with midwifery groups pushing for the Department of Health and Human Services to provide legal protections for them, and some midwives have been in contact with the agency.

HHS spokesperson Emily Hilliard declined to comment on policy proposals but told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News that the administration “regularly meets with a wide range of stakeholders to hear input from the American public.”

Hospitals Want Guardrails

Advocates for the license say allowing certified professional midwives to provide care would help address a shortage of maternity care providers.

“Some midwives are leaving our state,” Rep. , a chiropractor who sponsored the Georgia bill, said during a hearing on the measure last year. “They’re being forced to quit. And now we have a shortage of these providers to take care of our pregnant moms.”

A by the March of Dimes found that 35% of counties in the U.S. have no birthing facility or obstetric provider. Georgia has the 13th-highest maternal mortality rate in the nation, according to the .

After the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade in 2022 eliminated federal protection for abortion, six-week abortion bans prompted more providers to leave states such as Georgia and Texas. Idaho lost by December 2024, two years after its abortion ban took effect. Doctors who left states with such laws cited fear of prosecution and an inability to provide the standard of care.

Of the 13 states with the fewest maternity care providers per capita, nine had a full or six-week abortion ban as of 2024, .

Licensing midwives won’t solve the larger maternity care shortage, but it’s a first step, said , a professor of midwifery and the principal investigator at the Birth Place Lab at the University of British Columbia. Certified professional midwives currently attend only about 1.4% of births in the U.S., according to federal data.

The would have granted certified professional midwives licenses through a state board, allowed them to administer lifesaving medications, and required their services to be covered by private insurance and Medicaid. They would not have needed a physician to supervise them. Without that mandate, giving birth outside of a hospital could be an option for more people.

But the Georgia Department of Public Health and the Georgia Hospital Association opposed the licensing bill, primarily because they wanted more regulations than the midwives were willing to accept — including physician supervision.

Anna Adams, a spokesperson for the hospital association, suggested establishing transfer agreements that required all women planning to have a home birth to register at the hospital first. When a laboring woman is transferred to a hospital, which happens in about , “we have no prior knowledge of this patient,” Adams said. “It’s a tricky situation to inherit when you’re trying to save the mother and the baby without any background.”

Georgia midwives said they planned to bring the licensing proposal back next year.

In early April, three midwives for restricting their ability to practice, arguing that the rules violate the state constitution.

“Every pregnant person should be able to choose where they give birth and with whom,” said Jamarah Amani, a plaintiff in the lawsuit and co-founder of the .

Black women are three times as likely to die during or after childbirth as white pregnant patients. In January, a prominent Black nurse-midwife in South Carolina died after unexpected complications from childbirth.

Today, midwives and their clients are predominantly white, but the home birth rate among Black women rose 42% nationally from 2019 to 2024, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Ultimately the system has failed us as a people,” said Tina Braimah, a Black nurse-midwife who attended home births for a decade. She then opened a in North Carolina, allowing her to see more clients from a variety of backgrounds. “When the system consistently fails you, you look for other options.”

Becoming Part of the System

Many maternal health researchers say mothers fare better when midwives are a key part of the health system. In 2018, researchers at the Birth Place Lab published a study of all 50 states showing that integrating midwives was associated with better outcomes for moms and babies, including lower rates of infant deaths. Integration involves collaboration among all kinds of midwives and doctors so that patients can easily transfer to or from a hospital. It also involves giving all midwives the authority to practice the full range of their skills, including prescribing lifesaving medication.

A by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine states that data from other countries suggests home births can be as safe as hospital births for low-risk women who are part of an integrated, regulated system.

Washington state has one of the highest rates of in the U.S., according to the . Its home birth rate is consistently higher than the national rate, while its remains lower than the national average.

One in 5 women report being mistreated during maternity care, according to a . Pregnant patients tend to be more satisfied when midwives lead their care, whether at a hospital, a birth center, or home.

Hannah Haynes gave birth to her first three children in a hospital near her home in Jefferson, Georgia. During the third labor, which was induced, she received a catheter that led to a urinary tract infection and then sepsis, a life-threatening condition. She was separated from her newborn for four days while receiving treatment.

“Something has to change,” Haynes said.

Haynes regrets electing to get induced when it wasn’t medically necessary. She gave birth to her fourth child at home, with the help of a certified professional midwife she trusted. She’s pregnant with her fifth and plans to use the same midwife. She said she won’t deliver at a hospital again.

“I was a little nervous,” Haynes said, because she had heard rumors that midwives didn’t know what they were doing. But after meeting the midwife, “I just felt so confident in her.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

State governments rely on such companies to design and operate computer systems that assess whether low-income people qualify for Medicaid or food aid through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as food stamps. Those state systems have a history of errors that can cut off benefits to eligible people, a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation showed.

These benefits, provided to the poorest Americans, can mean the difference between someone obtaining medical care and having enough to eat — or going without.

States are now racing to update their eligibility systems to adhere to President Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and domestic spending law. The changes will add red tape and restrictions. They are coming at a steep price — both in the cost to taxpayers and coverage losses — according to state documents obtained by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and interviews.

The documents show government agencies will spend millions to save considerably more by removing people from health benefits. While states sign eligibility system contracts with companies and work with them to manage updates, the federal government foots most of the bill.

The law’s Medicaid policies will cause to become uninsured by 2034, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Roughly will lose access to monthly cash assistance for food, including those with children.

In five states alone, for state officials and reviewed by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News show that changes will cost at least $45.6 million combined.

“This is a pretty big payday,” said Adrianna McIntyre, an assistant professor of health policy and politics at Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The law, which grants tax breaks to the nation’s wealthiest people, requires most states to tie Medicaid coverage for some adults to having a job, and imposes other restrictions that will make it harder for people with low incomes to stay enrolled. SNAP restrictions began to take effect in 2025. Major Medicaid provisions begin later this year.

Documents prepared by consulting company Deloitte estimate that a pair of computer system changes for Medicaid work requirements in Wisconsin will . Two other changes related to the state’s SNAP program will cost an additional $4.2 million, according to the documents, which for the Wisconsin Department of Health Services.

In Iowa, changes to its Medicaid system are expected to cost at least $20 million, , a consulting company that operates the state’s eligibility system.

Optum — which operates the platform Vermont residents use for Medicaid and marketplace health plans under the Affordable Care Act — to evaluate and incorporate new health coverage restrictions.

Initial changes in Kentucky, which has had a contract with Deloitte since 2012, . And in Illinois, will cost at least $12 million.

A Historic Mandate

For six decades after President Lyndon Johnson created the government insurance program in 1965, Congress had never mandated that Medicaid enrollees have a job, volunteer, or go to school.

That will change next year. The tax and spending law enacted by Trump and congressional Republicans requires millions of Medicaid enrollees in 42 states and the District of Columbia to prove they’re working or participating in a similar activity for 80 hours a month, unless they qualify for an exemption. The CBO projected, based on an early version of the bill, that 18.5 million adults would be subject to the new rules — .

Vermont Medicaid officials expect it will cost $5 million in fiscal 2027 to implement changes in response to the federal law, said Adaline Strumolo, deputy commissioner of the Department of Vermont Health Access. About $1.8 million is for Optum to make eligibility system adjustments. Optum is a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act will subject nearly 55,000 Vermont Medicaid recipients to work requirements — about a third of the state’s enrollees.

The law forced the state “to essentially drop everything else we were doing,” Strumolo said in an interview. “This is a big, big lift.”

Optum’s contract with the state was as of October.

of adult Medicaid enrollees nationally are already working, according to KFF. Advocacy groups for Medicaid recipients say work requirements will nonetheless cause significant coverage losses. Enrollees will face added red tape to prove they’re complying. And eligibility systems already prone to error will have to account for employment, job-related activities, and any exemptions.

An estimated 5.3 million enrollees will become uninsured by 2034 due to work requirements, the .

In Wisconsin, state officials estimate could lose coverage after work requirements take effect. Not covering those people would in Medicaid spending for one year.

Wisconsin’s eligibility system for Medicaid and SNAP — known as CARES — in 1994, and initially was a transfer system from Florida, according to a 2016 state document.

Deloitte submitted its cost estimates for Medicaid and SNAP changes to the state in September and December. Elizabeth Goodsitt, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, declined to answer questions about whether additional changes will be needed, how much it will cost to make all eligibility system changes to comply with the new federal law, and whether the state negotiated prices with Deloitte.

Bobby Peterson, executive director of the public interest law firm ABC for Health, said Wisconsin has invested “very little” to help people navigate the Medicaid eligibility process, which soon will become more difficult.

“But they’re very willing to throw $6 million to their contractors to create the bells and whistles,” Peterson said. “That’s where I feel a sense of frustration.”

New Hurdles for Vets and Homeless People

Medicaid work requirements are only one change required by Trump’s tax law that will make it harder to obtain safety-net benefits.

Starting in October, the law prohibits several immigrant populations from accessing Medicaid and ACA coverage, including people who have been granted asylum, refugees, and certain survivors of domestic violence or human trafficking. Beginning Dec. 31, states must verify eligibility twice a year for millions of adults — doubling state officials’ workload. And the law restricts SNAP benefits by requiring more adult recipients to work and by removing work exemptions for veterans, homeless people, and former foster youth.

Days after Trump signed the bill in July, Kentucky health officials raced to make changes to the state’s integrated eligibility system, which verifies eligibility for Medicaid, SNAP, and other programs. Deloitte operates the system under a five-year . , initial changes costing $1.6 million were labeled a “high priority” and approved on an “emergency” basis, with some of the changes to the nation’s largest food aid program going into effect almost immediately.

Officials with Kentucky’s Cabinet for Health and Family Services declined to answer a detailed list of questions, including how much it will cost to make all the modifications needed.

Deloitte spokesperson Karen Walsh said the company is working with states to implement new requirements but declined to answer questions about cost estimates in several states. “We are delivering the value and investments we committed to,” Walsh said.

In most states, government agencies rely on contractors to build and run the systems that determine eligibility for Medicaid. Many of those states also use such computer systems for SNAP. But the federal government — that is, taxpayers — to develop and implement state Medicaid eligibility systems and pays 75% of ongoing maintenance and operations expenses, according to federal regulations.

“Five, 10 years ago, I’m not sure if you would hear much mention of SNAP from a Medicaid director,” Melisa Byrd, Washington, D.C.’s Medicaid director, said in November at an annual conference of Medicaid officials. “And particularly for those with integrated eligibility systems — as D.C. is —­ I’m learning more about SNAP than I ever thought.”

The federal law was the topic du jour at last year’s gathering in Maryland, held at the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center, the largest hotel between New Jersey and Florida.

Consulting companies had taken notice. Gainwell, an eligibility contractor and one of the conference’s corporate sponsors, emblazoned its logo on hotel escalators. Companies set up booths with materials promoting how they could help states and handed out snacks and swag.

“Conduent helps agencies work smarter by simplifying operations, cutting costs and driving better outcomes through intelligent automation, analytics, and innovation in fraud prevention,” read one such handout from another contractor. “Together, we can better serve residents at every step of their health journeys.” Conduent holds Medicaid eligibility and enrollment contracts in Mississippi and New Jersey, their Medicaid agencies confirmed to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

In handouts, Deloitte touted its role in “building a new era in state health care” and as “a national leader in Medicaid program and technology transformation, building a strong track record across the federal, state, and commercial health care ecosystem.” Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News found that Deloitte, a global consultancy that generated in revenue in fiscal 2025, dominates this slice of government business.

“With Medicaid Community Engagement (CE) requirements, states are tasked with adding a new condition of Medicaid eligibility to support state and federal objectives,” added another brochure. “Deloitte offers strategic outreach and responsive support to help states engage communities, lower barriers, and address access to coverage.”

A $20.3 Million Bill in Iowa

Before Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Iowa lawmakers wanted to impose their own version of work requirements. They would have applied to 183,000 people before any exemptions. The new law would necessitate a change to Iowa’s Medicaid eligibility system, according to documents prepared by Accenture, which operates Iowa’s system through a .

Adding the ability to verify work status would cost up to $7 million, . By July, the cost to implement the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s work requirements and other Medicaid provisions . Accenture’s analysis said the federal law necessitated . Making employment a condition of Medicaid benefits could cause an estimated 32,000 Iowans to lose coverage, according to a

Cutting 32,000 people from coverage in one year, a fraction of the Iowa and the federal government spend on Medicaid in a given year.

In Cedar Rapids, most of Eastern Iowa Health Center’s patients rely on Medicaid, CEO Joe Lock said. He questioned the government’s logic of spending tens of millions of dollars on a policy to remove Iowans from Medicaid.

Most of the health center’s patients live at or below the federal poverty level — currently .

“There is no benefit to this population,” Lock said.

Danielle Sample, a spokesperson for Iowa’s Department of Health and Human Services, did not answer questions about how much it will cost to implement changes to the state’s separate SNAP eligibility system.

In Illinois, the state’s work this year is largely focused on meeting major provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The state estimates that as many as 360,000 residents could lose Medicaid, largely due to the work requirements, said Melissa Kula, a spokesperson for the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services.

Kula confirmed that — priced at $12 million — is related to Trump’s law. The estimate also mentions other work. Kula said Deloitte is charging the state a $2 million fixed fee related to work requirements.

The Trump administration has acknowledged that the work is coming at a cost. In January, top officials for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services said government contractors, including Deloitte, Accenture, and Optum, have and reduced rates through 2028 to help states incorporate system changes.

“The companies were extremely excited to do this,” , the top CMS Medicaid official. “Everyone’s really focused on getting to work.”

CMS spokesperson Catherine Howden declined to answer questions about the discounts.

Goodsitt, the Wisconsin Medicaid spokesperson, declined to answer questions about whether Deloitte has discounted its rates. Officials with Kentucky’s Cabinet for Health and Family Services did not answer a detailed list of questions, including whether Deloitte extended discounts to make these changes.

It’s unclear what discounts, if any, Deloitte and Accenture have offered to individual states. Walsh, the Deloitte spokesperson, declined to answer detailed questions about the discounts the Trump administration announced this year. Accenture did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Strumolo, the Vermont health official, said state officials discussed the announcement with Optum “in detail.”

Optum for a specific module related to Medicaid work requirements. That product is unworkable for Vermont because it would mean “moving to a new system when we don’t have to.” When asked about whether the company offered discounts, Strumolo said “not explicitly.”

In a statement, UnitedHealth Group spokesperson Tyler Mason said Optum supports state implementation of new federal requirements “with a range of options to meet their unique cost and policy needs.”

He declined to specify whether Optum discounted Vermont’s rates and how it calculated the costs of doing its work. “Optum is helping mitigate upfront implementation expenses so states can focus on approaches that reduce duplication, accelerate implementation, and manage costs over time — supporting better outcomes for individuals covered by Medicaid,” Mason said.

Strumolo said Optum’s initial changes in Vermont cover items that take effect this year and in 2027 — Medicaid work requirements, checking eligibility every six months, and prohibiting certain immigrants from qualifying for health programs.

“There’s a lot more that could come,” she said.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

The legislation would prohibit state and local governments from requiring crisis pregnancy centers to perform abortions, provide referrals for abortion services, or inform patients about such services or contraception options. It also would allow crisis pregnancy centers to sue the violating government entity.

Wyoming lawmakers of the Center Autonomy and Rights of Expression Act, or , on March 4. Other versions have advanced in and this year. One was in 2025. The CARE Act is “model legislation” created by the , an anti-abortion, conservative Christian legal advocacy group.

A similar proposal, the , was introduced in Congress last year but hasn’t moved out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The Wyoming bill says that pregnancy centers, many of which are affiliated with religious organizations, need legal protection after facing “unprecedented attacks” following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade. It says that several state legislatures have introduced bills that . Opponents of these centers say they falsely present themselves to consumers as medical clinics, though they are not subject to state and federal laws that protect patients in medical facilities.

“Across the country, government officials are increasingly, increasingly targeting pregnancy care centers,” Valerie Berry, executive director of the in Cheyenne, said at a February legislative hearing on the Wyoming bill. “This legislation is not about creating division. It’s about protecting constitutional freedoms, freedom of speech, and freedom of conscience.”

Wyoming state , a Republican, expressed concern at the hearing about granting protections to pregnancy centers that other private businesses do not have.

“They have protections in place,” he said. “My issue with this is giving extra special protections.”

In 2022, Wellspring Health Access, the only clinic in Wyoming that provides abortions, in an arson attack.

“We are the ones providing the accurate information on reproductive health care, and we suffer the consequences for that,” Julie Burkhart, the president and founder of Wellspring Health Access, told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

, a professor at the University of California-Davis School of Law, said the proposed legislation would insulate crisis pregnancy centers from having to meet the standards that medical organizations face. It would blur the line between advocacy and medical practice, she said. And such legislation provides Republicans with a potentially useful campaign message ahead of midterm elections.

“The GOP needs a messaging strategy as for how it cares about women even if it bans abortion and even if it doesn’t want to commit state resources to helping people before and after pregnancy,” Ziegler said. “The strategy is to outsource that to pregnancy counseling centers, which of course increases the incentive to protect them.”

Model Legislation

The Alliance Defending Freedom is the same group that , the 1973 court ruling that protected the right to abortion nationwide. The group drafted model legislation to establish a 15-week abortion ban that was the basis of a 2018 Mississippi law. That led to the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court case that overturned Roe.

The alliance said its attorneys were unavailable to comment on the organization’s strategy for the CARE Act. In for the bill, the group said federal, state, and local efforts are targeting pregnancy care centers in a “clear attempt to undermine and impede” their work and shut them down.

In recent years, have been targeted with vandalism and threats.

But the attacks the model legislation primarily aims to address are the legal and regulatory efforts by some states seeking more oversight of the crisis pregnancy centers, including a California law requiring centers to clearly inform patients about their services. That law was overturned when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of crisis pregnancy centers’ argument that it violated their First Amendment rights.

The Supreme Court is that will decide whether states can subpoena the organizations for donor and internal information.

It’s unlikely that crisis pregnancy centers would face such regulatory measures in the conservative states where the legislation is under consideration. One Wyoming lawmaker acknowledged that in the February committee hearing.

Differing Services

During that hearing, state , a Republican who heads the committee sponsoring the bill, presented the measure as “so important, especially with our maternity desert,” referring to a lack of access to maternity health care services.

Some crisis pregnancy centers may have a few licensed clinicians, but many do not. Many offer free resources, such as diapers, baby clothing, and other items, sometimes in exchange for participation in counseling or parenting classes.

Planned Parenthood clinics, by contrast, provide a range of health services, such as testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections, primary care, and screenings for cervical cancer. They also are regulated as medically licensed organizations.

Since Roe was overturned, the abortion rights movement has faced significant challenges. Congressional Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last summer, to abortion providers. The move contributed to Planned Parenthood closing last year.

As of 2024, operated nationwide, according to a map created by researchers at the University of Georgia, compared with providing abortions at the end of 2025.

a research organization affiliated with the anti-abortion nonprofit SBA Pro-Life America, has suggested that pregnancy centers could help fill the gap left by the Planned Parenthood closures.

Ziegler said that would leave patients vulnerable to medical risks.

Centers’ Growing Power

Previous efforts in , Colorado, and Vermont to regulate crisis pregnancy centers arose from concerns over allegations of and questions about .

In 2024, in five states to investigate whether centers were misleading patients into believing that their personal information was protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, known as HIPAA, and to find out how the centers were using patients’ information.

Courts, including the Supreme Court, have regularly that argue the attempts at regulation are violations of their First Amendment rights to free speech and religious expression.

Crisis pregnancy centers also have seen a flood of funding since Roe was overturned.

At least , including crisis pregnancy centers, according to the Lozier Institute.

Six states distribute a portion of their federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families funding — cash payments meant for low-income families with children — to crisis pregnancy centers. Texas, Florida, Tennessee, and Oklahoma have provided tens of millions of dollars for the organizations.

One analysis found that crisis pregnancy centers also received from 2017 to 2023, including from the 2020 relief package signed into law during Trump’s first term amid the covid pandemic.

Despite the challenges clinics that provide abortions face, Burkhart, the head of the Wellspring facility in Wyoming, said it’s important to continue offering access to people who need it. She’s helped open clinics in rural parts of other conservative states and said those clinics continue to see people walking through their doors.

“That proves to me, regardless of your religion, political party, there are times in people’s lives that people need access to qualified reproductive health care,” she said. “That includes abortion.”

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

The 59-year-old, who lives in Harrisburg, North Carolina, closed her nonprofit circus arts school last year because she could no longer see well enough to complete paperwork. She then worked making dough at a pizza shop for a bit. Currently, she sorts recyclable materials, including cans and bottles, at a local concert venue. It is her main source of income ― but the work isn’t year-round.

“This place knows me, and this place loves me,” Kelley said of her employer. “I don’t have to explain to this place why I can’t read.”

Kelley, who lives in a camper, survives on less than $10,000 a year. She says that’s possible, in part, because of her Medicaid health coverage, which pays for arthritis and anxiety medications and has enabled doctor visits to manage high blood pressure.

But she worries about losing that coverage next year, when rules take effect requiring millions of people like Kelley to work, volunteer, attend school, or perform other qualifying activities for at least 80 hours a month.

“I’m scared right now,” she said.

Before the coverage changes were signed into law, Republican lawmakers suggested that young, unemployed men were taking advantage of the government health insurance program that provides coverage to millions of low-income or disabled people. Medicaid is not intended for “29-year-old males sitting on their couches playing video games,” House .

But, in reality, adults ages 50 to 64, particularly women, are likely to be , said Jennifer Tolbert, deputy director of the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. For Kelley and others, the work requirements will create barriers to keeping their coverage, Tolbert said. Many could lose Medicaid as a result, putting their physical and financial health at risk.

Starting next January, some 20 million low-income Americans in 42 states and Washington, D.C., will need to meet the activity requirements to gain or keep Medicaid health coverage.

Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wyoming didn’t expand their Medicaid programs to cover additional low-income adults under the Affordable Care Act, so they won’t have to implement the work rules.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts the work rules will result in at least 5 million fewer people with Medicaid coverage over the next decade. Work rules are the largest driver of coverage losses in the GOP budget law, which slashes nearly $1 trillion to offset the costs of tax breaks that mainly benefit the rich and increase border security, .

“We’re talking about saving money at the expense of people’s lives,” said Jane Tavares, a gerontology researcher at the University of Massachusetts Boston. “The work requirement is just a tool to do that.”

Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon said requiring “able-bodied adults” to work ensures Medicaid’s “long-term sustainability” while safeguarding it for the vulnerable. Exempt are people with disabilities, caregivers, pregnant and postpartum individuals, veterans with total disabilities, and others facing medical or personal hardship, Nixon told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

Medicaid expansion has provided a lifeline for middle-aged adults who otherwise would lack insurance, according to . Medicaid covers 1 in 5 Americans ages 50 to 64, giving them access to health coverage before they qualify for Medicare at age 65.

Among women on Medicaid, those ages 50 through 64 are more likely to face challenges keeping their coverage than their younger female peers and are likely to have a greater need for health care services, Tolbert said.

These middle-aged women are less likely to be working the required number of hours because many serve as family caregivers or have illnesses that limit their ability to work, Tolbert said.

Tavares and other researchers found that of the total Medicaid population is considered “able-bodied” and not working. This group consists largely of women who are very poor and have left the workforce to become caretakers. Among this group, 1 in 4 are 50 or older.

“They are not healthy young adults just hanging out,” the researchers stated.

Plus, making it harder for people to maintain Medicaid coverage “may actually undermine their ability to work” because their health problems go untreated, Tolbert said. Regardless, if this group loses coverage, their chronic health conditions will still need to be managed, she said.

Adults often start wrestling with health issues before they’re eligible for Medicare.

If older adults don’t have the means to pay to address health issues before age 65, they’ll ultimately be sicker when they qualify for Medicare, costing the program more money, health policy researchers said.

Many adults in their 50s or early 60s are no longer working because they’re full-time caregivers for children or older family members, said caregiver advocates, who refer to people in the group as “the sandwich generation.”

The GOP budget law does allow some caregivers to be exempted from the Medicaid work rules, but the carve-outs are “very narrow,” said Nicole Jorwic, chief program officer for the group Caring Across Generations.

She worries that people who should qualify for an exemption will fall through the cracks.

“You’re going to see family caregivers getting sicker, continuing to forgo their own care, and then you’re going to see more and more families in crisis situations,” Jorwic said.

Paula Wallace, 63, of Chidester, Arkansas, said she worked most of her adult life and now spends her days helping her husband manage his advanced cirrhosis.

After years of being uninsured, she recently gained coverage through her state’s Medicaid expansion, which means she’ll have to comply with the new work requirements to keep it. But she’s having a hard time seeing how that will be possible.

“With me being his only caregiver, I can’t go out and work away from home,” she said.

Wallace’s husband receives Social Security Disability Insurance, she said, and the law says she should be exempt from the work rules as a full-time caregiver for someone with a disability.

But federal officials have yet to issue specific guidance on how to define that exemption. And experience from Arkansas and Georgia ― the only states to have run Medicaid work programs ― shows that many enrollees struggle to navigate complicated benefits systems.

“I’m very concerned,” Wallace said.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

It’s feeding time for the animals on this property outside Nashville, Tennessee. An albino raccoon named Cricket reaches through the wires of its cage to grab an animal cracker, an appetizer treat right before the evening meal.

“Cricket is blind,” said Robert Sory, who is trying to open a nonprofit animal sanctuary along with his wife, Emily. “A lot of our animals come to us with issues.”

The menagerie in Thompson’s Station includes Russian foxes, African porcupines, emus, bobcats, and some well-fed goats.

The Sorys are passionate about their pets and seem to put the animals’ needs before their own.

Both Robert and Emily started 2026 without health insurance.

Robert had been covered through a marketplace plan subsidized through the Affordable Care Act. His share of the monthly premiums was $0. When he looked up the rates for 2026, he saw that a barebones “bronze”-level plan would cost him at least $70 a month. He decided to forgo coverage altogether.

“When you don’t have any income coming in, it doesn’t matter how cheap it is,” he said. “It’s not affordable.”

Dumping Coverage

Marketplace plans from the Affordable Care Act no longer feel very affordable to many people, because Congress did not extend a package of enhanced subsidies that expired at the end of 2025. Last week, the House did pass legislation to extend the expired subsidies, and negotiations have moved to the Senate. Without a deal, an estimated will go without coverage this year.

But even without a health plan, people will still need medical care. Many, like the Sorys, have been thinking through their plan B to maintain their health.

The Sorys both lost jobs in November, within days of each other. Robert worked as a farmhand. Emily worked at a staffing firm and lost her insurance along with her position.

“It’s a horrible, horrible market right now. Really tough,” she said.

The first time she had to pay out-of-pocket for her three monthly prescriptions, the cost was $184.

“To equate that to kind of how we think about it, you’re talking about 350 pounds of food for these animals,” Robert said. He pointed to his bobcats, who eat only meat.

Workarounds for the Newly Uninsured

To keep kibble in the food bowls, the Sorys are prepping for an uninsured future. They see the same psychiatrist and met with him to make a plan. He was willing to work with them by charging $125 per visit. They’ll have to go every three months to keep their prescriptions current.

And if other medical problems emerge? They’re hoping for the best.

“I’m not somebody who gets sick super often, thank God,” Robert said. “And if I do, generally I go to an emergency room where they’re going to bill me later.” Robert said he would arrange a repayment plan for bills like that.

Emily has costly health conditions and has already taken on substantial medical debt. “It’s just sitting there, and I’ve racked up money,” she said. “But I’ve had to go to the doctor.”

Donated Drugs and Sliding Scales

Hospitals and clinics are of newly uninsured patients. They’re also concerned that people won’t know about alternative ways to get medical care.

“We don’t have marketing dollars, so you’re not going to see big billboards or radio ads,” said , CEO of in Nashville. It’s one of the country’s 1,400 federally qualified health centers, also called FQHCs.

FQHCs are by the federal government. Although they do not usually offer free care, their fees tend to be lower or on a sliding scale.

Uninsured people who get care receive a bill, Beard said, “but the bill will be based on their ability to pay.”

FQHCs often have on-site pharmacies, and some offer prescription medications free of charge through a partnership with the , a Nashville-based nonprofit.

Many hospital pharmacies also partner with the nonprofit, which has donated by pharmaceutical companies to 277 sites in 38 states. must make the medicine available free of charge to people without insurance who have annual incomes below 300% of the federal poverty limit.

The organization primarily sources medications for chronic conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and mental health. Demand is expected to outstrip supply in the new year, according to .

“We’re projecting and engaging with our manufacturers and asking them, ‘Are you willing to help support, for this future status that we are anticipating?’” he said. “By and large,” he said, pharmaceutical companies have said they’re willing to step up.

“It’s a continuous conversation that we’re having,” Cornwell said.

A Medicaid ‘Gap’ in 10 States

Hospitals will also have to find a way to care for more patients who cannot pay. Industry groups such as the have been vocal about the threat to hospitals’ financial health and have urged Congress to extend the enhanced subsidies, which take the form of tax credits.

The impact might be most acute in states like Tennessee that have not expanded Medicaid to cover people who work but do not have job-based insurance and cannot afford it on their own.

Ten states have chosen not to expand Medicaid to uninsured, low-income adults — an optional provision of the ACA that is mainly paid for by federal funds.

This Medicaid “gap” is , at the high end of the spectrum, by as much as 65% in Mississippi and by 50% in South Carolina, according to the Urban Institute.

As Emily Sory pets a Russian fox, she admits she is keenly aware that she will soon become part of this growing population. After all, her last job involved health care staffing. Her mother is a nurse.

“I understand the system. And I get it’s people like me that don’t pay their bill are why it suffers. And I feel bad,” she said. “But at the same time, I don’t have the money to pay it.”

This article is from a partnership that includes , , and Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

More than three-quarters of American adults didn’t get a covid shot last season, a figure that health care experts warn could rise this year amid new U.S. government recommendations.

The covid vaccine was initially popular. About 75% of Americans had received of the first versions of the vaccine by early 2022, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows. But only about 23% of American adults got a covid shot during the 2024-25 virus season, well below the 47% of American adults who got a flu shot. The vaccination rates for , , and tetanus are also going down.

Yet covid remains a serious, potentially deadly health risk, listed as the primary cause of death on roughly 31,400 death certificates last year. By comparison, flu killed people and pneumonia, a common complication of the flu, killed , .

As millions of Americans decide whether to get a covid shot this season, public health researchers worry vaccination rates will slide further, especially because Hispanic and Black Americans and those under 30 have lower rates, exposing them to serious complications such as long covid. Under the Trump administration and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the federal government has narrowed its recommendations on the covid vaccine, leading to a hodgepodge of rules on pharmacy access, with Americans living in Republican states often facing more barriers to getting a shot.

“A lot of misinformation is going around regarding covid,” said , an assistant professor of health, society, and behavior at the University of California-Irvine. “Vaccine hesitancy is going to increase.”

In August, the FDA for covid vaccines to those 65 or older and to adults and children with at least one underlying condition that puts them at high risk for serious complications from covid.

A month later, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices “shared clinical decision-making” on the vaccine, pulling back from advising all adults to get vaccinated. The committee advised doctors to emphasize to adults under 65 and children that the benefits of the vaccine are greatest for those with underlying health conditions.

The guidance is rebutted by infectious disease experts who say most adults and children should get both the flu and covid vaccines, which are safe, effective, and prevent serious illness. Several independent medical organizations like the American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Academy of Pediatrics have reiterated their support for broad adoption of covid vaccines.

More than two dozen states have taken steps to ensure most people can get a covid shot at the pharmacy without a prescription, with many states tying their policies to the advice given by medical organizations. And many of those states require insurers to cover vaccines at no cost, according to . In several other states, predominantly Republican-led, pharmacy access to vaccines may require a prescription.

Among the most commonly cited reasons for covid vaccine hesitation are fears about side effects, long-term health consequences, and the effectiveness of the vaccine, and mistrust of pharmaceutical corporations and government officials, according to of multiple studies, published in the journal Vaccines.

Covid vaccine hesitancy in the 2024-25 virus season was higher among Latinos, African Americans, men, uninsured people, and people living in Republican-leaning states, CDC data shows.

Latino adults were significantly less likely than adults from most other racial and ethnic groups to get a covid shot last season, with a vaccination rate around 15%.

Some of that may be due to age: A of Latinos are young. But public policy actions may also be a factor. The first Trump administration, for example, tied Medicaid to “public charge,” a rule allowing the federal government to deny an immigrant a green card or visa based on their dependence on taxpayer-funded programs. Some Latinos may be afraid to sign up for social services even after the Biden administration reversed those first-term Trump actions.

Haro-Ramos co-authored published in 2024 that found many Latinos were hesitant to get vaccinated because of fears about their immigration status, and that experiencing health discrimination, like care denials or delays, increased their vaccine hesitancy.

“Do you trust the health care system, broadly speaking? Do you want to provide your information — your name, your address?” Haro-Ramos said. “Trust is critical.”

Haro-Ramos said the problem has likely worsened since her study was published. The Trump administration that it would give the personal information of Medicaid enrollees to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Many Latinos are canceling doctor appointments to head off possible confrontation with immigration enforcement officials.

“People are avoiding leaving their homes at all costs,” Haro-Ramos said.

, an associate professor at the University of Georgia College of Public Health, recently of covid vaccination among nearly 1,500 African Americans living in south Georgia. The study found that participants were more likely to listen to their health care providers than faith leaders or co-workers when seeking advice on getting vaccinated.

More than 90% of those studied had received at least one dose of the vaccine, but those who were unvaccinated were more likely to agree with false statements that tied vaccines to miscarriages, to components’ remaining in the body for a long time, or even to the conspiracy that they implant a computer chip in the body.

“It’s the clinicians who can take the messages about vaccination — that these are myths,” Rajbhandari-Thapa said.

Even though covid hospitalization and death rates have fallen dramatically since the worst days of the pandemic, fatal complications related to covid remain most common among older people. of U.S. covid deaths last year were among people 65 and older, compared with of flu and pneumonia deaths.

As the pandemic falls into the rearview, young people have developed a sense of invincibility. Only 11% of Americans ages 18 to 29 received a vaccine during the 2024-25 virus season, the lowest vaccination rate among adult age groups. That’s far below the who got at least one dose of the initial covid vaccines by November 2023.

While many people get covid after receiving a covid shot, because the vaccine’s ability to prevent infection wears off pretty fast, some misunderstand the purpose of the shot, said , an infectious disease specialist at UCLA Health.

“They think, ‘Well, the vaccine didn’t prevent me from getting covid, so the vaccine didn’t work,’” Yang said. “And what they’re not seeing is that the vaccine prevented them from getting severely ill, which is ultimately the most important thing.”

And the vaccine can help prevent long covid, which is a problem for all ages, Yang said. A recent Northwestern University study younger adults suffer worse symptoms of long covid than older adults.

Ultimately, Yang said, it is not a consistent choice to get a flu vaccine but forgo a covid vaccine, since both are safe, effective, and prevent serious illness. It is clear, he added, that people with compromised immune systems and those at higher risk should get a covid shot. The decision is “a little bit less clear” for others, but “probably most adults should be getting vaccinated, just like it’s recommended for the flu vaccine, as well as most children.”

Phillip Reese is a data reporting specialist and an associate professor of journalism at California State University-Sacramento.

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .