Tag: disabilities

  • Some with disabilities fear risky pregnancies

    Some with disabilities fear risky pregnancies

    By Clarissa Donnelly-DeRoven

    In her regular life, Asheville resident Tiffany Grzankowski lives with a lot of pain. She has Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, a cluster of genetic disorders that impacts connective tissue. For Grzankowski, in addition to chronic pain, EDS means her blood pressure and heart rate rise and fall without much warning, she breaks bones easily, and she feels nauseated often due to a paralyzed stomach.

    All those symptoms worsened when she became pregnant. 

    “I was throwing up every day for the entire pregnancy,” she said. “If I stood up for too long, like, say I was grocery shopping or something, I’d have to use one of the scooters because I would faint.”

    She asked her doctors for advice, but they didn’t have much. 

    “They were just like, oh, you know, drink some stuff with salt in it,” she said. “I was left to figure out everything on my own.”

    It’s an experience “that’s unfortunately very common,” explained Willie Horner-Johnson, a professor of public health at Oregon Health and Science University who co-authored a recent study examining health disparities for pregnant people with disabilities. 

    Horner-Johnson and her team found that nearly 20 percent of all people who give birth in the U.S. identify as having a disability. 

    “It’s pretty consistent with the proportion of disability in the population,” she explained, but it’s a massive increase from previous estimates. 

    Earlier studies suggested that between just 1 and 6 percent of people who gave birth had a disability. Those numbers were gathered by analyzing medical claims data and diagnosis codes. But this new study analyzed responses from the National Survey of Family Growth, which thanks to a provision in the Affordable Care Act, now collects data on health disparities.

    Horner-Johnson’s study also found that compared to their non-disabled peers, disabled people were more likely during their pregnancy to be younger than 20, un-partnered, without a college degree, and to have lower incomes. They also were more likely to smoke during pregnancy, experience delays starting prenatal care, have a preterm birth, and have children born with lower birth weights.  

    “The disparities that we’ve found were actually pretty consistent with prior research that was based on diagnosis codes,” Horner-Johnson said. “But now we know that those disparities are much more widespread than it appeared to be from those studies. 

    “It’s really clear that births to people with disabilities are not that rare,” she said.

    A history of restricted reproductive rights

    Those well-documented disparities, experts say, are tied to this country’s long legacy of eugenics practices, which often deprived disabled people of their reproductive rights.

    “Reproductive rights of people with disabilities have not been a priority — I think that’s the most gentle way to say it,” Horner-Johnson said. “Generally, if people were thinking about parenting and people with disabilities at all, it was from a prevention point of view.”

    Those narratives have led people with disabilities to be thought of as desexualized, incapable of parenting, “and so therefore unlikely to carry a pregnancy to term,” said Corye Dunn, the director of public policy at Disability Rights North Carolina. 

    That was certainly Grzankowski’s experience. She said during her second pregnancy, once she learned her daughter would be born with Down Syndrome, multiple doctors pressured her to have an abortion. 

    “They said that I had no business being a disabled, single woman having a disabled child,” she said. “And it wasn’t just one doctor, it was like two or three doctors.” She said doctors lectured her about how having a child with a disability would be a lot of work, and she shouldn’t assume that she’ll be able to give her child to her parents if things got too tough. 

    “I’m like, ‘would you be saying this stuff if I had no health issues? I don’t understand why me being disabled has anything to do with my ability to care for a child,’” she said. “I’m not against abortion at all, but it’s not in the cards for me. I’m having this baby, no matter what. And no one’s gonna stop me. And I remember the doctor said something like, basically, the decision I was making was a dumb decision.”

    Lack of education

    Because clinicians and other caregivers are just as likely to have the same biases about people with disabilities as the general public, the kind of reproductive education disabled people receive can be clouded and incomplete.

    “We don’t do a great job of teaching our clinicians about the humanity of people with disabilities,” Dunn said, “So it’s not surprising that folks don’t get prenatal care until later if they have a cognitive disability. It’s not surprising that people with multiple disabling conditions engage in smoking or another contra-indicated activity — not because they’re bad people or don’t want to do well for their potential child, but because they don’t get the information.”

    Also feeding into this is the reality that there’s very few requirements in medical school that teach clinicians how to give thoughtful and competent health care to people with disabilities. 

    “A lot of medical programs have none. Maybe there’s an hour-long presentation somewhere,”  Horner-Johnson said. “It’s really piecemeal. There aren’t accreditation requirements. There’s no standard requirement that a certain amount of disability-related instruction be included. It’s just as somebody with an interest has the capacity to create something at one particular center. There are a few of those that are scattered around, but nothing systematic.”

    Moreover, medicine has historically treated disability as a “negative health outcome,” not a demographic group, Horner-Johnson explained. Clinicians might feel more comfortable trying to “fix” the disability, rather than learning how somebody lives with, and around their condition and  attending to their other medical needs.

    A shifted burden

    This leads many patients to feel as though their clinician isn’t actually the one with expertise. Rather, they feel that the pressure to explain their disability and how it’s impacting their pregnancy falls squarely on their shoulders. 

    “It shouldn’t be a patient’s responsibility,” Dunn said, “And yet, every single patient with a disability knows that if they don’t take some ownership of that they are at risk because providers don’t do it well enough.”

    For Grzankowski, not having a supportive or knowledgeable medical team made her pregnancy — which was already an exhausting physical experience — into an emotionally stressful period as well.

    “When I think about everything that we went through, I feel grateful that I knew what to do,” Grzankowski said. But, she added, not everyone can do that. “So, there needs to be a lot of changes across the board for pregnant women.”

    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    Close window

    Republish this article

    As of late 2019, we’re changing our policy about reprinting our content.

    You are free to use NC Health News content under the following conditions:

    • You can copy and paste this html tracking code into articles of ours that you use, this little snippet of code allows us to track how many people read our story.




    • Please do not reprint our stories without our bylines, and please include a live link to NC Health News under the byline, like this:

      By Jane Doe

      North Carolina Health News



    • Finally, at the bottom of the story (whether web or print), please include the text:

      North Carolina Health News is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit, statewide news organization dedicated to covering all things health care in North Carolina. Visit NCHN at northcarolinahealthnews.org. (on the web, this can be hyperlinked)

    1

  • Reproductive rights for people with disabilities in NC

    Reproductive rights for people with disabilities in NC


    By Elizabeth Thompson

    As the reproductive rights of people under guardianship came into the national spotlight with the #FreeBritney movement, disability advocates in North Carolina say people with disabilities in this state could easily face similar threats to their rights.

    In the case of pop star Britney Spears, she was not allowed to remove her IUD so she could have a third child, despite being rich, white and in the public eye. Spears was legally unable to make decisions because she was under a conservatorship, a legal process in which the court declares a person “incompetent” and someone else is appointed to make their decisions for them. 

    The social movement to free Spears from her father’s conservatorship showed that even a wealthy celebrity, recognizable by only her first name, could lose her reproductive autonomy.

    “Imagine what it’s like for everyone else,” said Larkin Taylor-Parker, staff attorney at Disability Rights North Carolina (DRNC).

    North Carolinians under guardianship, much like Spears’ conservatorship, can face a similar overthrow of their reproductive rights, Taylor-Parker said. It’s unclear how many guardianships there are in the state, but parents of children with disabilities often seek them out as their child ages into adulthood. It’s also a legal mechanism sought by families of aging parents as their mental state declines.  

    In North Carolina, people with disabilities who are deemed “incompetent” in court are given a guardian to make decisions for them. Those decisions include everything from where they live and how they spend their money to decisions regarding sex and relationships. A guardian can be a family member or state employee, such as a social worker. 

    Often guardianship is not revisited once it is given, meaning people can permanently lose their rights to make decisions for themselves starting as early as age 18, said Betsy MacMichael, president of First in Families of North Carolina, a statewide nonprofit that provides support to people with disabilities and their families.

    No forced sterilization

    North Carolina is one of just two states that bans forced sterilization for people with disabilities under guardianship, a new report from the National Women’s Law Center found. Sterilization is a surgical procedure that permanently prevents pregnancy.

    There are still 31 states and the District of Columbia that allow forced sterilization. The only other state that bans forced sterilization outright is Alaska, according to the report.

    North Carolina’s law was a response to the state’s prior eugenics movement, when thousands of North Carolinians were targeted based on race, class and, in particular, disability and sterilized without their permission throughout much of the 20th century. However, the legacy of the movement continues to live on, advocates say, as long as disabled people often do not have the right to their bodily autonomy.

    Although the state eugenics program was shuttered in the 1970s, the state did not officially outlaw involuntary sterilization until 2003, after groundbreaking research by Johanna Schoen, now a professor at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey and an investigative series by the Winston-Salem Journal called “Against their Will.”

    Forced sterilization directly compromises a person’s right to their bodily autonomy, said Ma’ayan Anafi, author of the National Women’s Law Center report.

    Just because North Carolina bans forced sterilization does not mean that people with disabilities under guardianship have the ability to make their own reproductive decisions. 

    The right to ​​bodily autonomy

    North Carolina’s law banning forced sterilization, passed in 2003, prevents guardians from consenting to sterilization unless the person under the guardianship “needs to undergo a medical procedure that would result in sterilization.” 

    This statute impedes disabled people’s ability to choose to get sterilized if they want to, Anafi said.

    “Disabled people can make decisions about our health care and about birth control, including sterilization,” Anafi said.

    Taylor-Parker said they also worry that an unintended consequence of the sterilization law is that it could interfere with a transgender person’s ability to get gender confirmation surgery if they are under guardianship.

    “That’s a very real concern that I think will continue to come up in years to come,” Taylor-Parker said. “For reasons no one understands, there is a strong correlation between autism and LGBT identity. So it’s particularly of concern for that population, but also for many others.”

    Even if protections exist against sterilization, access to birth control and the ability to make decisions about sex and relationships could be difficult for people with guardians. 

    Disabled people are often infantilized by non-disabled people, said Corye Dunn, director of public policy at DRNC. Historically, sterilization gave non-disabled people the option to refrain from educating disabled people about sex, even as people with disabilities have higher rates of sexual assault, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Denying people with disabilities accurate information about sexuality also ignores the idea that disabled people might want a relationship or to engage in consensual sexual activity, she said.

    “There should be nothing surprising about the fact that people with disabilities are also sexual human beings,” Dunn said, “that they may want to engage in consensual sexual activity.” 

    Guardianship makes it difficult for people with disabilities to make those choices, especially if a guardian is a loved one.

    “Family, often they’re quite opinionated,” MacMichael of First in Families said. “Whether it’s relationships, sexuality, or things like drinking and smoking pot, that kind of thing. So if a person has a guardian over them … they pretty much can’t call the shots.”

    Reassessing guardianship

    A judge overturned Spears’ conservatorship in November of 2021, transforming #FreeBritney from a movement to a statement.

    Disability rights advocates hope that the movement continues, arguing that as long as guardianship remains as widely used and unchecked practice as it is, disabled people will continue to have their rights taken away.

    Dunn advocates for periodically revisiting whether guardianship is necessary. Currently, there is a “presumption of permanency” of a guardianship decision in North Carolina because cases are not required to go back to court.

    “It’s this life sentence,” Dunn said.

    At First in Families, MacMichael suggests alternatives to guardianship, such as support networks, where people with disabilities can make important decisions with the help of an array of people.

    “Just because people need help making decisions does not mean that we have to have substitute decision making,” Dunn said. “We can build in those supports for people in different ways. And I think that sexuality and relationships and reproduction and parenting are some of the most intimate rights that we have and they deserve more attention.”

    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    X

    Republish this article

    As of late 2019, we’re changing our policy about reprinting our content.

    You are free to use NC Health News content under the following conditions:

    • You can copy and paste this html tracking code into articles of ours that you use, this little snippet of code allows us to track how many people read our story.




    • Please do not reprint our stories without our bylines, and please include a live link to NC Health News under the byline, like this:

      By Jane Doe

      North Carolina Health News



    • Finally, at the bottom of the story (whether web or print), please include the text:

      North Carolina Health News is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit, statewide news organization dedicated to covering all things health care in North Carolina. Visit NCHN at northcarolinahealthnews.org. (on the web, this can be hyperlinked)

    1