According to women’s advocates across the US, many are concerned anything and everything will be used against them if they’re found to have had an abortion deemed illegal in the state it was performed in. And period trackers could play a part in that equation.
If legal cases against people who have had an abortion go ahead, then a person’s search history, location data and period tracking apps could all assist the prosecution.
And if abortion is criminalised in certain states, some period-tracking apps based in the US could potentially have little choice but to share their customers’ most personal data if subpoenaed.
Some of the most popular apps on the market include Flo, Stardust, Natural Cycles and Clue.
As for Flo, things are a bit complicated.
They’re a US-based company, and in their terms and conditions on ‘how we use your personal data’, it lists legal obligation as one of their conditions.
In a statement this week, Flo has urged users that they “do not share health data with any third party”. But privacy isn’t a new concern when it comes to period tracking apps, especially for Flo.
Flo – which has around 43 million active users worldwide – faced legal action after the Federal Trade Commission alleged the app shared sensitive user data with third parties for advertising purposes, Insider reported.
It reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission, and in this case, the Wall Street Journal found that Flo was informing Facebook every time its users indicated they had their period or were wanting to get pregnant. Flo did not admit to any wrongdoing in the settlement.
The US Supreme Court, in the Dobbs case, has ruled that the states, not the federal courts, determine a woman’s right to an abortion generally, and upheld the state of Mississippi’s restriction on abortion after the 15th week. supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf…I think the effort to replace biological sex with gender made the advocates for Roe/Casey incompetent to argue for women’s rights. Men are not women and the difference matters on a lot of levels. The left & Biden marched forward with a brief that ignored women and their history.The refused to make historical arguments women could make—they insisted on making the due process argument, the same one essentially made in Obergefell, but relying on modern changes in how we think about women.The court recognized this. It said at p. 30 that “Instead of seriously pressing the argument that the abortion right itself has deep roots, supporters … contend that the abortion right is an integral part of a broader entrenched right.”Remember, although here they defended Roe, the fringe left has been pushing a narrative of unlimited abortion rights. They view the abortion issue now as “bodily integrity” and have tied it to trans rights.So what now? A right to an abortion will be determined in every US state for that state’s citizens. People can travel to another state.There may still be constitutional arguments left, but the 14th Amendment due process is not the strongest with this court.
Now that the Supreme Court has given the green light for lawmakers to prohibit abortion, several states, most of them Republican-led, have taken quick steps to do so.Three states — Kentucky, Louisiana and South Dakota — had so-called “trigger bans” that went into effect automatically with the Supreme Court’s reversal Friday of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 ruling that had established a constitutional right to an abortion. Ten other states have trigger bans with implementation mechanisms that occur after a set period or after a step taken by a state government entity.
Massive protests swept across the US in response to the supreme court decision overturning the constitutional right to abortion.
Soon after the decision was released on Friday, reversing federal reproductive protections that have been in place for half a century, pro-choice demonstrators began gathering in major cities and smaller towns in a wide range of communities and regions.
In Boise, Idaho, a demonstrator held a sign that read, “I shouldn’t have to fight a fight my mom already won.” In Charlotte, North Carolina, activists shouted, “My body, my choice!” And in downtown Los Angeles, marchers took over the streets, chanting, “We are not your incubators. Fuck the court and the legislature!”
Is abortion still legal in your state? Use our access tool to discover what states still allow abortion and which have adopted abortion restrictions.
The United States Supreme Court has overturned Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 decision which recognised Americans’ constitutional right to abortion and legalised it nationwide, handing a momentous victory to Republicans and religious conservatives who want to limit or ban the procedure.
- The 6-3 ruling upholds a Mississippi law banning abortion after 15 weeks
- Judges found Roe v Wade was wrongly decided because the constitution makes no specific mention of abortion
- Individual states will now decide whether abortion will be legal
The court’s ruling goes against an international trend of easing abortion laws, including in such countries as Ireland, Argentina, Mexico and Colombia where the Catholic Church continues to wield considerable influence.
In an Australian first, women in NSW will be able to access a network of dedicated health services to help them deal with menopause symptoms.
The NSW government has promised more than $40 million in funding in its 2022-23 budget to enable women to receive targeted support when they need it and shift the stigma around menopause.
The government will establish 4 new hubs and 16 holistic menopausal services across the state.
Currently, one in five women experience severe or prolonged menopause symptoms, but not enough are able to access targeted health support.
Common symptoms women experience during menopause include hot flushes, sleep problems, fatigue, night sweats, hair thinning, muscle and joint aches, and emotional changes. Most women become menopausal between the ages of 45 and 60 years, marking the end of the reproductive life stage.
NSW Treasurer Matt Kean said supporting women through menopause was important for their health, but would also help boost their economic security.
“This can have profound effects on not only a woman’s health, but also her financial security, as she is forced to spend or forgo income to look after herself,” Kean said.
“That’s why we’re establishing 16 holistic menopause services across NSW, helping to break down social stigmas around discussing and seeking treatment for menopause.”
We’re caught between a cock and a hard place.
Today, politically engaged women have two depressing options. We can align with parties on the left which refuse to recognize the existence of women let alone our humanity. Or we can work alongside the right, which in the US means with those who force women to become mothers and then leave them financially unsupported. Any self-respecting woman can’t fail but to feel unsatisfied and sullied by this grubby, and notably binary decision.
Compared to feminism, malestream politics is simple. For Marxists, people are bracketed according to their relationship with the means of production – this is naturally based on the male as default. The productivity of women as mothers has largely been seen as an inconvenience by the traditional left and an endpoint by the religious right. Arguably, in this way feminists have always sat outside of the patriarchal powerplay that is party politics.
But now many feel a sense of urgency, a need to stop an impending disaster by any means necessary. Fifty years on from the championing of PIE & NAMBLA, today’s mainstream left is still driven by male fetishes and the redistribution of resources has slipped down the agenda. Instead, those who believe themselves progressive advocate for our daughters to be sold into prostitution, for the sterilization of youth, and for the destruction of the category of ‘woman’. Whether this is a greater or lesser threat than the rolling-back of abortion rights is arguably a matter of personal morality and priorities.
It is understandable that some women feel anger that feminists have aligned with the right. We should not have had to make a pragmatic alliance with those who in other circumstances would relegate us to home and hearth. But to others what is happening to the rights of women and the bodies of children is an emergency that demands drastic measures. Given this, the rage of feminists embedded on the left towards those whose tactics differ seems misplaced. After-all, when men overcome ideological differences in pursuit of a common goal it is recognized as politics.
Ultimately, it would be more productive if we were to offer each other a little leeway. Whether one opts to work with the nihilistic perverts on the left to protect bodily autonomy, or the anti-abortionists to protect society from pornography or transgenderism, is irrelevant in the end. We didn’t make the rules within which we’re forced to play, nor did we choose the game.
- Melissa Cook became a surrogate mother to help pay her bills after divorce
- She discovered the father was single, deaf 51-year-old living with his parents
- He then demanded she ABORT one baby because he couldn’t afford it
- He asked clinic staff to limit her visits despite complications such as hypotension \
‘When I became pregnant with triplets, I was thrilled,’ she reflects. ‘I believed then that everyone has the right to be a parent.’
However, six years on, she thinks very differently. For not only did she never see the three babies after they were born, but she has no idea where they now live.
Long-running legal efforts to get access to the children have failed and she is profoundly worried that they are not safe.
Melissa’s case was thrown out by the District Court of California and the Appeals Court. A request for it to be heard by the Supreme Court was denied.
‘All this has been devastating. It’s affected my own children and my boyfriend, too,’ she says. ‘I think about the triplets all the time, wondering how they are.
‘Commercial surrogacy shouldn’t be allowed. The mother has no rights. No one ever checked the home of the intended father before the triplets were born.
‘He didn’t even have to go through a psychological background check like I did. When we went to court, the judge said the contract I signed basically gave the father all rights to the children.
Becker had had a stillbirth at a California hospital, losing a baby boy at eight months pregnant. The King’s county prosecutor in the central valley charged her with “murder of a human fetus”, alleging she had acted with “malice” because she had been struggling with drug addiction and the hospital reported meth in her system.
Becker’s attorneys argued there was no evidence that substance use caused the stillbirth and California law did not allow for this type of prosecution in the first place. Still, she spent 16 months in jail awaiting trial before a judge dismissed the charges.
Becker’s nightmare offers a preview of the kinds of criminal cases that could become commonplace in the US if the supreme court, as expected after the leak of a draft opinion last month, officially overturns Roe v Wade. In the states that outlaw abortion, advocates warn, pregnancy losses more broadly will be treated as potential crimes, including in cases of wanted pregnancies. Even with Roe in effect, women have repeatedly faced arrest and charges for their pregnancy outcomes.
Pregnant women have been criminalized for falling down stairs; giving birth at home; exposing a fetus to dangerous “fumes”; having HIV; not resting enough during the pregnancy; not getting to a hospital fast enough while in labor; being the victim of a shooting; and self-inducing an abortion.
Substance use is one of the most common allegations, with mothers facing charges even when there’s no evidence of harm to the fetus and in some instances, even after they have given birth to a healthy baby.