Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday March 18 2023, @02:54PM   Printer-friendly

The COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the higher rate in 2020 and 2021:

An increasing number of U.S. women are dying during pregnancy or soon after giving birth, according to the latest data on the maternal mortality rate.

In 2021, there were 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared with 23.8 per 100,000 in 2020 and 20.1 in 2019, the National Center for Health Statistics reports March 16. The U.S. rate greatly exceeds those of other high-income countries. The total number of U.S. maternal deaths rose from 861 in 2020 to 1,205 in 2021.

There remains a wide disparity in the maternal mortality rate for Black women, at 69.9 deaths per 100,000 live births, compared with white women, at 26.6 per 100,000. Many social determinants of health underlie this gap, including differences in the quality of care that Black women receive before, during and after pregnancy.

The NCHS report doesn't discuss the reasons behind the increase for 2021. But COVID-19 contributed to a quarter of maternal deaths in 2020 and 2021, the U.S. Government Accountability Office reported in October. The pandemic also contributed to the mortality disparity between Black and white women, the GAO found, worsening existing structural inequities that lead to such issues as barriers to getting health care (SN: 4/10/20).

The U.S. maternal mortality rate has risen overall since 2018. The highest rate is among non-Hispanic Black women compared with Hispanic women and non-Hispanic white women.

The maternal deaths captured by the NCHS report are those that occur during pregnancy or within 42 days of the end of the pregnancy, "from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management." These causes include hemorrhaging, infections and high blood pressure disorders such as eclampsia.

The report excludes deaths after 42 days and up to the first year after birth. But 30 percent of pregnancy-related deaths occur during this period, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in September, from an analysis of the years 2017 to 2019.


Original Submission

 
This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @07:51PM (12 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @07:51PM (#1296934)

    Theoretically only if they determine the law isn't constitutional. Messy business at best.

    I'm not sure that the Founding Fathers considered the ramifications of political parties in their otherwise pretty brilliant creation. Pity.

  • (Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @08:22PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @08:22PM (#1296942)

    > Theoretically only if they determine the law isn't constitutional. Messy business at best.

    Ah bullshit. Vote 6-4, overrule precedent, inform us the previous SC decision was "egregiously wrong". Move into the next one.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:03PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:03PM (#1296951)

      All they ruled was that abortion wasn't a Constitutional right, which is exactly right. It's not in the Constitution, which means it's a State's Rights issue.

      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:11PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:11PM (#1296954)

        Exactly correct, but it doesn't fit the infant murderers' narrative. Not sure why they can't use birth control. I'll gladly pay for it for them, especially if it's permanent. Don't need more of those depraved scum. Oh the irony of the liberals rejecting power being given back to the people. Somethings very wrong in their "brains". I'm concluding they're insatiable, will always find something to complain about, even when it will backfire on them someday.

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @10:53PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @10:53PM (#1296970)

          > power being given back to the people

          So tell us about all this power being given back to the people. Are they even asking the people? Not a chance after Kansas voted the wrong way. Oops!

    • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:06PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @09:06PM (#1296952)

      Overruling an erroneous and illegal precedent, giving the power back to the people in accordance with the Constitution, does't fit your narrative this time, so you call "bullshit"? You're beyond moron- you're in moron's second basement. You want to subvert the US Constitution without a proper Congressional Amendment. I call you traitor. You're such a moron I pity you, but you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @10:54PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @10:54PM (#1296971)

        I find your comment egregiously wrong. Case closed.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @11:57PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2023, @11:57PM (#1296977)

          Wow, brilliant response. Bravo!

          /s

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20 2023, @01:24PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 20 2023, @01:24PM (#1297158)

            Good enough for the finest legal minds on the Supreme Court.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday March 20 2023, @08:59PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday March 20 2023, @08:59PM (#1297275) Journal

        Ah yea! Nothin says "don't tread on me" like handing all of your private medical information over to the federal government!

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Sunday March 19 2023, @05:33AM (2 children)

    by mhajicek (51) on Sunday March 19 2023, @05:33AM (#1297018)

    They did, and warned us that political parties were the greatest enemy of democracy.

    --
    The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
    • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday March 20 2023, @06:32PM (1 child)

      by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Monday March 20 2023, @06:32PM (#1297240) Homepage Journal

      That may be correct. I personally consider anyone who votes for a party rather than the individual candidates to be stupid lemmings; that ballot is a vote to hire someone. You want to hire someone on the basis of being in your club rather than fitness for the job? That's how Trump, probably the least qualified president in US history got elected. And it almost cost us our democracy.

      --
      mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday March 24 2023, @03:23PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday March 24 2023, @03:23PM (#1297981)

        The best counter to straight party ticket voting: vote by mail + the internet. For the time it takes to travel to the polls and back, you can research the candidates in the races and make much more informed decisions vs. REP/DEM/LPF and some names you might have seen on a sign while driving in. Although my research pretty clearly labeled all LPF (the Libertarian Party of Florida) candidates I looked up as Proud Boys in thin disguises and just seeing an LPF on a candidate should be a very polarizing piece of information in itself. In comparison, there's a lot more diversity within the REP and DEM candidates, and I voted for some of each of those in the recent election.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]