A new KFF issue brief examines the implications of a Supreme Court with a solid conservative majority. Two abortion cases have pending requests for Supreme Court review: Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization and FDA v. ACOG. If the Court chooses to take these cases, abortion laws and who can…
- view as grid
- view as list
This brief examines the implications of a Supreme Court with a solid conservative majority for two abortion cases which have pending requests for review. If the Court chooses to take these cases, abortion laws and who can legally challenge them could be affected in major ways.
This brief and side-by-side tables reviews the key health issues that are likely to have a direct impact on women’s health as well as their access to coverage and care, and summarizes the presidential candidates’ stated positions and records on these issues.
Voters in three states will decide on four ballot measures in November that could play a significant role in shaping policies and programs that impact women’s health, including abortion, sex education, and paid leave. This brief examines the initiatives and their potential effects.
A new KFF brief provides a comprehensive overview of the coverage and use of fertility services in the United States, highlighting cost and insurance coverage gaps as key barriers faced by low-income people, Black and Hispanic people, LGBTQ individuals, infertile couples and single individuals seeking these services. The coronavirus pandemic…
This brief examines how access to fertility services, both diagnostic and treatment, varies across the U.S., based on state regulations, insurance type, income level and patient demographics.
Intrauterine devices (IUDs), along with implants, are known as long-acting reversible contraception (LARCs) because they can be used to prevent pregnancy for several years. This fact sheet reviews the various IUDs approved by the FDA; awareness, use, and availability of IUDs; and key issues in insurance coverage and financing of IUDs in the United States.
This fact sheet provides an overview of the history of the Kemp-Kasten amendment, which states that no U.S. funds may be made available to “any organization or program which, as determined by the president of the United States, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization,” and examines its current application. Since enacted in 1985, Kemp-Kasten has often been used to withhold funding from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
The U.S. Government and International Family Planning & Reproductive Health: Statutory Requirements and Policies
This fact sheet summarizes the major statutory requirements and policies pertaining to U.S. global family planning/reproductive health (FP/RH) efforts over time and identifies those currently in effect, including the Mexico City Policy and the Kemp-Kasten Amendment.
An overview of the Mexico City Policy, which requires foreign NGOs to certify that they will not “perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning” using funds from any source (including non-U.S. funds) as a condition for receiving most U.S. government global health assistance.