'An amazing first step': Advocates hail Congress's maternal mortality prevention bill
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Kira Johnson's presence is everywhere in her two young sons' lives. Poster-sized pictures of her fill their house. They regularly watch home videos of her. And their father, Kira's husband Charles Johnson IV, brings her sense of adventure and determination into everything they do as a family.
"I try to do Kira-style, like Mommy would do it," Johnson said. "My mantra is just wake up and make Mommy proud."
And while Johnson loves to talk about Kira with his sons, 4-year-old Charles Johnson V and 2-year-old Langston, there are some questions they ask about their mother — who died hours after giving birth to Langston — that he struggles to answer.
Kira Johnson and her husband, Charles Johnson IV, with their son Charles Johnson V at his birthday party. Courtesy of Charles Johnson IV "Charles will ask, 'Does Mommy like soccer?' and I'm like, 'Mommy loves soccer.' And he's like, 'Well, can she come to my game?" Johnson said. "Or Charles will as: 'Is Mommy mad at me? Why won't she come home?' You try your best to articulate: 'Well, Mommy is in heaven. She's doing important work with God.' And he says, 'I want to go to heaven.' Those are the things that are the most painful.'"
Kira, 39, an accomplished businesswoman in hospitality and education, died in the early hours of April 13, 2016, a day after giving birth to Langston via a scheduled Cesarean section.
The Johnsons' story is far from an isolated incident: Each year in the United States, about 700 women die as a result of pregnancy or delivery issues — while 50,000 experience severe complications , according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Despite the stunning statistics — America ranks the worst out of all developed nations on maternal mortality, a rate based on deaths of women while giving birth or within a year after — attempts to address the crisis have failed on a federal level.
But last week, Congress unanimously passed a bill that authorizes $60 million over the next five years to prevent maternal mortality in America. The money will fund maternal health review committees in all 50 states, enabling them to collect data on what is killing women during or after childbirth. Every task force will have to follow the same guidelines to receive the grants, which will provide uniformity to maternal mortality data collection across states for the first time.
"This is an amazing first step," said Dr. Lisa Hollier, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. "Having high-quality data that is comparable across jurisdictions is going to be so very valuable to our prevention efforts."
Not every state has such a task force and many of those that do face funding shortages. The federal dollars will inject them with cash, as well as provide money needed to create maternal mortality review committees in the remaining states.
The goal of tracking the information is to provide basis for policy changes, which could include creating new protocols for dealing with issues during or after delivery.
"What I anticipate will be able to come from having better data is more specific solutions to address the problems that we're seeing, and solutions that are designed to meet the need of the particular populations that are being served," Hollier said.
Read more at the seeded content
Tags
Who is online
102 visitors
I was totally shocked to find out how many women die due to pregnancy complications. How about you?
Here is what I think; $60M across 50 states...hmmmm? I am just thinking, wth is that going to put in place for data acquisition?
Maybe a couple meetings and a vague idea of the data acquisition requirements and methods?
I am thinking with all the "quality of care" "stuff" that has been put in to place since the 80s this kind of data should be available at the click of a button.
If it is not, maybe we are all down that "VA healthcare" path where one wonders where the money actually goes and why in the world don't we have this information already?
Healthcare is a money sucking mess.
Here's what I think.
Every Federal Agency has an Office of Women's Health as well as an Office of Minority Health. Each has their own mission based on which Agency they reside in. BUT - they also have established relationships with health care professionals and academia in which they collaborate and partner with including sharing data. This is where the coordination for this study should lie. In order to get the most out of this small budget, a Centers of Excellence should be established and a SOW should be written with clear outcomes and deliverables. Universities and other interested parties would submit proposals for consideration.
This is the best way to coordinate the efforts and resources across the board by allowing these Agencies to subsidize this money with their own thereby boosting the study.
NPR ran a pretty good series on maternal mortality recently. We need to do better.
"prevent mothers' deaths during and after childbirth, which happen at alarming rates in America."
Bad doctors....or just one or more aspects of the process of living and Life that we are always trying to "Alter" !
Sometimes bad doctors. Sometimes bad nurses. Sometimes bad hospital policies. Sometimes unhealthy patients.
Don't you think we SHOULD be trying to make childbirth safer for mothers?
I hear "Abortion" is a popular solution !
Stop with this friggin double standard shit.....please !
You either want to "SAVE" or you don't.....unless you're just for this "Where the Wind Blows" thingy !
Is this article about abortion?
No.
I'm not quite sure why someone would have a problem with trying to reduce maternal mortality.
[deleted]
Fits in the same realm of the article. It's a QUICK FIX to ANY problem.
Government MUST Pay for …...whatever....on the Tax payers dime....just because !
It's claimed IN THE ARTICLE FOR THAT MATTER, that reproductive rights/problems SHOULD be, and now IS paid for by others !
But then it's CLAIMED/SHOUTED/YELLED ……. stay out of reproductive rights !
You can't demand your "Cake", then expect someone else to get your Cake too, after you told folks to STAY AWAY FROM YOUR "CAKE" in the first place, then say all is well !
If you want to pay for it yourself, since it was your own choice.....go for it on your own.
Should I have to pay for it too ?
So, rather than take measures to reduce maternal mortality, you'd rather suggest abortion?
Why?
Do you think government should have absolutely no role in promoting physical welfare by determining, for example, that mothers should be more closely monitored for excessive blood loss in the post-partum period? Is that something we need to be outraged about?
[deleted]
In this day and age......YES....NO ROLE !
If one doesn't know by now that life problems can come up, yet do nothing to insure they have the means in the first place, NOT MY PROBLEM OR COST !
We don't live in the age of Neanderthals anymore. We are actually taught things, and hopefully know things these MODERN days.
How many "Cracked Eggs in frying pan" commercials does it take to sink in ? (Facefuckingpalm)
This article is not about infant mortality but mother mortality. It is ridiculous that we have such a high pre and post mother mortality. It would be the equivalent of finding out that kids were dying from going to school. We should know why and see if we can stop it.
Ok, you get that this isn't about lack of ability to pay on the patients' part, yes?
This is about determining which practices may be contributing to increased maternal mortality, and which practices might be instated to reduce it.
Women with insurance and money still suffer pregnancy-related mortality and morbidity.
And yes, we don't live in the age of Neanderthals anymore. We do have better knowledge of medicine. Why do you have a problem with implementing that knowledge more effectively?
Yep......and the Medical community does what ever they can to make it better for them.....based on their medical expertise !
If you actually read thee article, this tax payer funded 12 bazillion dollars is ONLY for:
"funding maternal health review committees in all 50 states, enabling them to collect data on what is killing women during or after childbirth."
Not Actual health care !
If they don't know the ins and outs of birthin' a baby by know.....a bazillion tax payer dollars for a study done by a few, ain't helpin' nothing more than.....well.....ANY ONE !
And what happens if that 5th Doctor disagrees with the report ?
How do you propose we address problems we haven't identified?
And no, health care workers don't always do what's needed to improve conditions, as evidenced by our high maternal mortality rate.
Seems one goes with the other.
Why do some people get Cancer and Some Don't.
The funding for those, 4 out of 5 doctors agree, studies is a waste of tax payer money.
Who really cares why one does and one doesn't. The medical communities job is to concentrate on the one in front of them at the time. Not some "General" could be study !
We aren't ALL the SAME....even if one wants it to be that way !
That's really how you think medical research is conducted?
Since EVERYONE on this planet ISN'T the same...… Specifically Identifying anything in each and every individual on this planet..... is Impossible......No matter how many studies are done !
I never read a claim that they were. You're arguing against something nobody has said.
A study for "General" medical treatment , doesn't help ALL !
Sure.... "Smoking may cause Cancer" in some, but not all.
WHY ?
But "'Bazillion Dollar Studies" do just that. They generalize for the big bucks given over by government from the Tax Payers backs !
Yeah, you didn't answer the question.
What you're referring to ("4 out of 5 doctors agree") is a survey of what doctors' opinions are. That's not research into causal relationships.
The research proposed would seek to identify factors which actually do lead to maternal mortality, not what doctors think leads to maternal mortality. And yes, it can be broken down to tailor to the specific needs of women with identified comorbidities, such as gestational diabetes, thrombophilia, and preeclampsia.
In fact, that's kinda the point. We're not addressing these issues as well as we should be.
What ?
You do know that in order to have a scientifically driven opinion, a study would have had to have been done to look at, in order to come to the conclusion.....right ?
"The research proposed would seek to identify factors which actually do lead to maternal mortality,"
AGAIN.....everyone isn't the same !
Will they sample billions and billions of people on this planet for their study ?
Did you know that there are people on this planet that scientist STILL scratch their heads about ?
What did "So-and- So" do to live to over one hundred ?
So-and-So will tell you what they did throughout their life, but medically, it's a stumper !
Absolutely not. These are women who wanted their babies and died for them. How is that the same?
Every hospital is mandated to give cancer treatment.
Huh? Every disease now treated started with a study. Where did you get that stat?
And of course we are not all the same, but we are talking half of the human population. I think that is pretty much a substantial reason.
AGAIN! Nobody said they are.
Perhaps the study will show that we aren't identifying and monitoring women with clotting disorders closely enough. Case in point - Serena Williams, who had a known problem with blood clots, and was ignored when she first complained of symptoms consistent with a clot.
BTW - she has $.
Perhaps we're not paying enough attention to vitals taken in the prenatal period. Some women are different from other women in that they develop preeclampsia. They require closer monitoring through the prenatal and postpartum periods. And some aren't getting it.
And BTW, they don't all have a scientifically-driven opinion. That's part of the problem here.
The millionth "Study" on stuff like this, will let them USE/ABUSE...… more of our money. just give it a chance ? (facepalm)
Yeah?
Links to the other 999,999?
And have we implemented what we've learned from them?
Or are women still dying unnecessarily (here's a hint - yes, they are)?
That's between you and your doctor. it shouldn't be a cause for a bazillion dollar study, that will most likely tell us that Doctors have become impersonal towards us over the years !
WE ALREADY KNOW THAT !
There has never been a study on this, so I have no idea of where you come up with the " millionth "Study" on stuff like this". Tell me, would you feel the same way, if you found out that male ejaculation caused sudden heart attack? I think not.
And what is a bazillion dollar study gonna change ?
"Or are women still dying unnecessarily "
Men are still Dying too ?
Everyone dies ……. one time. And age doesn't seem to be a factor in death. it just is what it is !
I'm not looking to live forever. Who wants to work that long !
heck....if I died eight years ago.....I wouldn't have known I did anyway. Requiring Partners living long, is all for the Other partners wants.
Hospital policies.
I never said they weren't. I presume you still seek medical care when it's needed, and would like to know that your doctor is providing treatment that has some evidence of being safe and effective?
But if you have kids, I'm going to assume you're glad you got to watch them grow up, rather than dying a few hours after they were born of a preventable or treatable condition.
Oh, did you go to the hospital? One funded by other taxpayers? One that provides treatment researched using taxpayer funds?
Those women never knew they did. only the Father knows that now.
"Every hospital is mandated to give cancer treatment."
And as long as that has been going on, not one "Study' has cured the problem.
"but we are talking half of the human population."
Can this planet sustain unlimited "CURED" growth ?
"Death" is needed in order to sustain what is available on this planet !
Well, there we have it, then. Let the women die. We have too many people anyway. And, somehow, ABORTION ABORTION ABORTION!
We get it. It's unreasonable to want to live through pregnancy. Damn uppity women.
And whom has reported on all studies ever done ?
people have been looking/studying/reporting on life since we knew what life was.
That's a "Liability" issue. Always has been.
"and would like to know that your doctor is providing treatment that has some evidence of being safe and effective?"
If I'm out of it, I wouldn't know. If I need a procedure that I know about, I will look into doctors before I agree to the treatment.
The study in the article being funded.…..singles out no one person. it will be a generalization that we paid for. Guarantee, someone will still die from pregnancy complications, even years after the study is complete.
Yes.....yet....Shocker of all shockers.....funded by ME and my paid for insurance company !
And the "Clue' your basing your opinion on iiiiiisssssss ?
You never gave me a single answer on any of my questions but just dodged them. I see no purpose on continuing.
Everyone wants to live. humans can only do so much though, no matter how many studies are done !
Just sayin' !
And it's not being done.
Did it receive government funds at all?
Was the treatment you received ever the subject of a taxpayer-funded study?
I'm betting it's a "yes" on both counts.
You were the beneficiary of that which you would deny to others.
You Assume much !
"Tell me, would you feel the same way, if you found out that male ejaculation caused sudden heart attack?
Now, Since I've ejaculated three kids worth, and more than that for fun, that is a "Silly" question....wouldn't you think ?
IF WE FOUND THAT WOMEN GETTING PREGNANT WOULD KILL YOU AS SOON AS YOU CONCIEVED...…..NO MATTER WHO YOU WERE...….
Would You ?
Sorry to disappoint.....but NO !
"Was the treatment you received ever the subject of a taxpayer-funded study?
Again....Sorry to disappoint, but No !
Kneejerk, Kneejerk, kneejerk....when a response doesn't suite you.
Women have been giving birth since the "Birth" of man !
How did those women do it before the miracle of the soft Hospital bed !
Did population growth not start until modern medicine came to be ?
No public funds whatsoever? That's a pretty rare hospital.
And frankly, since most medical treatments have been the subject of some taxpayer-funded study at some point, I'm going to bet you're just saying "no" as a matter of course, rather than because it's actually true.
It actually IS !
Just because the Human doctor doesn't cure ALL to your satisfaction, doesn't mean nothing is being done !
[Removed]
And why allow a man to "mansplain" childbirth to we women who have suffered thru it and know the possibility of death?
Nobody said the problem could be "cured".
Addressed would be nice.
[Removed]
Waiting for you still !
here I am opinionating on the subject, and all you can do is talk about ME !
Good fucking job Tessy !
Really know.
ya got the records from the hospital I went to, to link to us ?
It's addressed up to the ability of human knowledge.
if your looking for a "God" type intervention, that type of intervention is shunned these days. (Smiley face with a wink)
It's always just about ME with you, isn't it Tessy ! (Rolling eyes)
I'm playing the odds. The odds say that it's likely that your care was subsidized at some point and to some degree by public funds.
People actually lose millions doing that.
No, it hasn't been. If it had, other industrialized nations wouldn't have better outcomes.
Didn't know this was a competition.
in case you forget, saving a few in a country with a few million, doesn't make them better than a country that saves the same few in a population of 100's of millions.
The human saved count still work out to be the same !
Save 100 in a population of 1 million is still the same as 100 saved in a population of 300 million.
100 is still ...… 100 !
I can't think of any hospital that doesn't get some kind of government funding. Even the CHIs get funding
Tell it to the kids whose moms died when they shouldn't have.
Exactly.
My mom Died. Should I tell myself ?
Or are you talking about newborns, that NEVER knew the mother in the first place.
I'm sorry for that.
Don't you think most kids would like to have their mom around? Even the ones whose moms didn't live long enough for them to remember?
So, basically, you're admitting that it hasn't been addressed to the ability of human knowledge, and that you're ok with that.
How admirable.
No I wouldn't.
OK guys.. let's cool it with the vague insults and the troll word.
Adopting a child is sooo hard and expensive these days. How many kids are hoping for a home every year ?
Ya see, it's not all about giving birth, if your gonna use the kid angle as an argument !
FYI..... I was adopted myself ! (Smiley Face with a wink)
Your just being nice because it's Trout. "Now guys"...….. (snicker face)
SP and you would have deleted me for being "No Value" if it weren't for that !
Thank goodness my statement isn't true huh !
And the fathers of those motherless children? No sympathy for them suffering a loss that didn't have to happen?
Who ?
And what medical miracle would have prevented what happened to those "individuals" ?
I know it would be a daunting task, but each individual incident would be nice to be able to read about. It might give me a better perspective on this supposed "Finite"? subject.
Why assume it's a miracle? It may well be something other countries are doing as a matter of routine, that we're not.
First of all, SP has nothing to do with this.
Second, I am doing what I always do on MY ARTICLES, which is give people a reset to do better. You have been mouthing off at me in this article and yet you are still here, right?
SMH!
I've got quite a few deletes lately, not even being that blunt !
oh well huh !
And that would be ?
hahahahahaha !
From the mouth of the one who constantly tells me they NEVER read anything !
"Link" please.
Thanks for being non-Partisan BD. (super smiley face)
[deleted]
I did.....when I was 12 !
A bit harder for a youngin' than one that loses the mother they NEVER knew at birth huh ! (sad face)
removed for context
No.....You ASSumed that !
removed for context
For example, some hospitals weigh new mothers' sanitary pads and absorbent bedding to monitor blood loss. It's a more accurate method than "eyeballing". But it's not standard.
What the frig ?
The hospital my wife and I have ever been in, worry about "Blood Loss" …..period. They don't need to weigh some pad !
Holy shit !
Weighing "Pads" is considered "More Progressive" medicine ? (facefuckingpalm)
That's a more accurate method
Well, some people consider women's lives to be important enough to practice evidence-based medicine. Some, obviously, do not.
I had a twin birth and they did it that way and I was losing too much blood. Turned out I had a mild case of DIC, due to my huge placenta not being fully scrapped out. Because they kept track of that, I didn't die, nor did I need a blood transfusion.
If we are going to talk medicine here, let's bring some facts.
Back in the good old days loads of women died in child birth. It was dangerous. Now, most western countries this doesn't happen, yet the US it happens more. There must be a reason for this.
And most like to use "Actual" medicine. Go figure !
They did a story on my local news a couple of weeks ago about a young woman who died in childbirth. It was really sad. The story was about how women are dying in unacceptable numbers in childbirth
A long read, but worth the time.