Oscar-Shortlisted Film ‘Belén’ Exposes the Injustice That Helped Transform Argentina’s Abortion Laws

Belén didn’t know she was pregnant until she miscarried in a hospital. She’d gone to the emergency room suffering excruciating abdominal pain. Instead of receiving care, she awoke from surgery handcuffed to her hospital bed and accused of having an illegal abortion.

This is the true story behind Belén, a powerful new Argentine film directed by, written by and starring Dolores Fonzi. It is based on the ordeal of a young woman from northern Argentina, chronicled in Ana Correa’s nonfiction book What Happened to Belén: The Unjust Imprisonment That Sparked a Women’s Rights Movement, the prologue of which was written by Margaret Atwood.

Despite a lack of evidence, Belén was charged with aggravated homicide and sentenced to eight years in prison.

After two years, Belén was freed, thanks to the legal work of activist and lawyer Soledad Deza and the sustained support of women’s organizations and women’s rights activists and movements, such as “Ni Una Menos” (Not One Less). Her case became a rallying cry for reproductive rights, with thousands taking to the streets under the banner #LibertadParaBelen (“Freedom for Belén”), paving the way for Argentina’s historic legalization of abortion in 2020.

I’m a Texan. But I Don’t Know if I Can Be a Texas OB-GYN.

Mary (not her real name) tells her story to Bonnie Fuller:

“Texans don’t give up easily, and I’m a Texan. I’m in my second year of medical school in Texas, and I’m studying to be an OB-GYN.

“I grew up in Texas, and I’m open-minded about staying in the state to practice obstetrics and gynecology after I graduate, despite the laws that ban most abortions from conception. A lot of the people that I love are in Texas, and there’s this big draw to stay here because it’s my community. I really want to care for other women.

“But what worries me most about practicing here is that I won’t be able to provide certain types of care because of the laws. I worry about the moral distress I’ll feel if I’m unable to act in particular cases—especially in emergency situations when a woman might need a termination and the law says that you can’t do one.”

The Supreme Court Case That Could Shield Unregulated Pregnancy Clinics From Oversight

On Dec. 2, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in First Choice Women’s Resource Centers v. Platkin, an unregulated pregnancy clinic’s constitutional challenge to the New Jersey attorney general’s subpoena for information about its operations, including donor records. 

Despite being awash in revenue, and serial reports of fraud, waste and illegal use of taxpayer funds, these antiabortion clinics are positioning to realize a long-term goal: to “replace” Planned Parenthood and Title X programs and secure federal taxpayer funds to advance an agenda that promotes childbirth and undermines evidence-based healthcare. 

As right-wing politicians decimate the reproductive health delivery system for low-income and uninsured Americans, the UPC industry is ramping up the narrative that their unregulated pregnancy clinics are the answer to the maternal healthcare deserts their policies have created. 

Most media observers are predicting the Court will rule for the crisis pregnancy center, First Choice. If it does, unregulated pregnancy clinics nationwide will be further emboldened to resist any state oversight, including of their medical services. A bold, innovative, multi-front action by reproductive justice advocates, public health professionals and pro-choice officials is the only way we ensure they can’t succeed. 

A Global Telehealth First: Women Help Women Begins Producing Abortion Pill Combipack

The feminist telehealth provider Women Help Women is redesigning how abortion pills are packaged to reflect what users actually need: a combination pack that includes one mifepristone tablet and eight misoprostol tablets for use up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

“It’s a huge revolution of who actually gets to decide when, how and with the support of whom they can have an abortion and until when,” said Women Help Women coexecutive director Kinga Jelinska. “It centers the needs of users rather than institutions or markets. The underlying notion is that abortion can be friendly, and abortion can be easy.” 

Self-managed abortion is disruptive. We were told that abortion is a difficult decision; that it has to be difficult to access, and that only doctors control it. Self-managed abortion subverts that,” said Lucía Berro Pizzarossa, fellow coexecutive founder.

She Was an Antiabortion Poster Child. Now She’s a Reproductive Freedom Activist.

At the age of 15, Charlotte Isenberg took to social media to process complicated feelings about a miscarriage after alleged sexual abuse. That was what first brought her to the attention of antiabortion groups.

“Almost immediately, anti-abortion actors threaded a narrative for me between my grief, my miscarriage and anti-abortion sentiment. I clung to it with desperation,” Isenberg wrote.

Feeling isolated from peers due to both her traumatic experiences and the COVID-19 pandemic, Isenberg found a sense of belonging in these online spaces.

But in May 2024, at age 20, Isenberg says her birth control failed, and she became pregnant for the second time. The timing was devastating: She was unemployed, without stable housing or transportation, and preparing to relocate for college—the first in her family to access higher education. 

When she couldn’t find adequate support for her unplanned pregnancy, Isenberg scheduled an appointment at her local Planned Parenthood for an abortion consultation, unsure of what she would ultimately decide. Another prominent antiabortion activist, one of Isenberg’s best friends in the movement, found out about her appointment; she and other members of the group intervened aggressively.

Despite this pressure, Isenberg was able to make the decision that was best for her and her body. Since her own abortion, she’s become a reproductive freedom activist, educating others about extremist antiabortion tactics and promoting systemic protections for people navigating reproductive healthcare. 

Twenty Thousand Stillbirths a Year, and No Federal Plan to Prevent Them

The U.S. loses over 20,000 babies to stillbirth each year, with many preventable. Across the country, pregnant women say their concerns are dismissed, with devastating consequences for maternal and fetal health. Yet stillbirth remains largely invisible in policy and public discourse, and families are left to deal with these tragic and costly losses with little support.

A new documentary from ProPublica, Before a Breath—based on the outlet’s Pulitzer Prize finalist reporting—follows three mothers who turn their grief from stillbirth into advocacy for safer pregnancies and better outcomes for expecting parents.

Her Pregnancy Wasn’t Viable. Wisconsin’s Laws Still Made Her Fight for an Abortion.

Abortion may be legal in Wisconsin, but the hurdles still involved forced mom Gracie Ladd, 33, to flee the state anyway.

“He recommended terminating the pregnancy because I was so low on amniotic fluid that Connor would most likely pass away before birth, which would put me at serious risk for infection. … I was aware Wisconsin had an abortion ban, but I was shocked to learn only two hospitals would do D&Es for someone 20 weeks pregnant.

“There was so much nonsense just for a woman to get essential care. …

“I received a huge amount of support from many people, even those I didn’t expect. That opened a door for me to use this experience to help other moms. … When Roe v. Wade fell, I wondered, ‘How do I help?’ But I felt insignificant, like my voice wouldn’t matter. But after this happened with Connor, it gave me a way to get involved and a reason to speak out about how abortion is healthcare.”

Repro Groups Sue Michigan Over Law Denying Pregnant Women Control of Their Bodies in End-of-Life Decisions

Bodily autonomy shouldn’t vanish with a positive pregnancy test—yet in Michigan, it can.

On Oct. 23, a coalition of Michigan women, physicians and patient advocates filed a lawsuit, Koskenojo v. Whitner, challenging the constitutionality of Michigan’s pregnancy-exclusion law that forces life support on pregnant women by denying incapacitated pregnant patients the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. The case relies on a voter-approved 2022 constitutional amendment that explicitly protects “the right to make and effectuate decisions about all matters relating to pregnancy.”

One plaintiff—Nikki Sapiro Vinckier of Birmingham, Mich.—explained her objections to Michigan’s pregnancy exclusion law. “As a woman and a mother, it’s infuriating to know that my body can still be regulated more than it’s respected. As a trained OB-GYN physician assistant, I know this law protects no one—it only punishes those who can get pregnant. The pregnancy exclusion clause isn’t about safety or care. It’s about control. There is no place for a law that discriminates against pregnant people in a state that claims to trust women.”

A Hunger for Justice: Why SNAP Cuts Are a Feminist Public Health Issue

When policy proposals like The One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the Trump administration’s recent attempt to partially suspend food-stamp payments threaten the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), we must acknowledge that these decisions are not about fiscal responsibility. They are an ideological manifestation of historical racism and sexism that inevitably punishes Black and brown families and undermines the stability of our entire society.

In fact, SNAP recipients are 45 percent less likely to experience food insecurity, demonstrating that SNAP is one of the most effective anti-poverty programs we have in the U.S.