Congresswoman Mary Gluesenkamp Perez, who represents Washington’s 3rd Congressional District covering the southern part of the state, including the cities of Vancouver, Longview and part of the southern Columbia River shoreline, is pushing Congress to study pain-relief methods for pregnancy loss after a recent miscarriage. She calls it a longstanding gap in women’s health care. Perez was able to include a provision in a House bill directing the U.S. National Institutes of Health to study pain-management strategies for miscarriage after sharing at hearings that she experienced excruciating pain she had not been prepared for.
Speaking to the Appropriations Committee, Democrat Perez said she lost a pregnancy at 11 weeks several weeks ago. Her doctor prescribed medication to expel the pregnancy, but the pain was worse than during the childbirth of her son four years earlier. “Women’s suffering is deeply underestimated,” she said, calling the current state of pain relief around reproductive issues “medieval.” Her amendment was unanimously approved by committee colleagues.
Reproductive-rights advocates applaud the congresswoman for her openness, acknowledging that women’s pain has long been ignored. But they doubt that a new NIH study will genuinely improve miscarriage care nationwide. The problem is that the spending bill that contains the amendment also calls for large cuts in funding for family-planning and reproductive-health programs.
Sarah Prager, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Washington, a central pillar of the state’s medical and scientific system, called Perez’s efforts “a drop in the ocean,” insufficient to offset the bill’s negative effects on reproductive care. Others criticize placing the study under the Trump administration, which they view as hostile to abortion rights and likely to conduct a biased study.
Some experts say a more effective solution would be improving physician education. Jennifer Allen, head of Planned Parenthood in multiple states, said: “We respect the congresswoman’s desire to ease pain, but we’re not convinced a study is what’s needed. The funds could be directed to real medical care.” She pointed to the importance of informing patients about the full range of pain-relief options.
The Appropriations Committee approved the broader bill and sent it to the House for consideration. Perez herself voted against the entire package, disagreeing with its contents. Her initiative highlights the sharp tension between the need for concrete improvements in women’s health care and the political constraints that impede their implementation amid current polarization in the U.S. It’s worth noting that Washington state sharply contrasts with conservative states: reproductive rights have been protected under state law there since 1991, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision did not change that situation, whereas in states like Texas or Idaho, abortions are nearly completely banned.
Based on: Gluesenkamp Perez pushes miscarriage pain study after personal loss