Asian American journalist says she was denied anchor promotion for being the ‘wrong minority’

Carl Samson
Fri, June 10, 2022,

An Asian American journalist who previously worked at Kansas-based Fox 4 (WDAF-TV) is reportedly suing the station’s parent company over her former news director’s alleged refusal to promote her for being the “wrong minority.”

Megan Murphy, better known as Megan Dillard, started working for Fox 4 in 2014 under a three-year contract, according to the suit. In 2017, she signed a new three-year deal when the station promoted her to news anchor.

In 2019, Murphy expressed interest in the lead evening anchor position when the journalist occupying the role, an African American woman only identified in the suit as “D.R.,” announced her departure. However, Sean McNamara, who became news director in December of the same year, allegedly refused to consider Murphy for the job.

The lawsuit, according to KCUR, alleged that McNamara denied Murphy the opportunity because “she was not Black/African American, which Defendant considered to be the ‘right’ minority.” The position reportedly remained open until August 2020 when the station hired Christel Bell, who is African American.

Murphy, who now works as director of public relations for the Independence School District, left Fox 4 in 2019 ahead of her contract’s expiration. She said the station’s discriminatory actions “left her with no choice but to resign.”

Murphy is suing Texas-based Nexstar Media Group, the parent company which owns Fox 4. She is seeking unspecified damages under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act, the federal law against intentional racial discrimination.

NextShark has reached out to Murphy and Nexstar for comment.

The 13th Amendment's fatal flaw created modern-day convict slavery


Kwasi Konadu, Professor in Africana & Latin American Studies, Colgate University

Clifford C. Campbell, Visiting Lecturer, Dartmouth College

THE CONVERSATION
Sun, June 12, 2022, 

In this rare photograph taken in 2000, prisoners at the Ferguson Unit in Texas are seen working in the prison's cotton fields. Photo by Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

The 13th Amendment is having a moment of reckoning. Considered one of the crowning achievements of American democracy, the Civil War-era constitutional amendment set “free” an estimated 4 million enslaved people and seemed to demonstrate American claims to equality and freedom. But the amendment did not apply to those convicted of a crime.

And one group of people are disproportionately, though not solely, criminalized – descendants of formerly enslaved people.

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,” the amendment reads, “except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

In other words, slavery still exists in America, but the only people whose labor can be enslaved are those convicted of a crime.

To some lawmakers and human rights advocates, that exception is a blight on democracy and the very idea of freedom – even for those convicted of a crime. As scholars of slavery and the histories of African America, our research shows the 13th Amendment’s exception clause reinvented slave labor and involuntary servitude behind prison walls.

Free labor

Since the late 1700s, U.S. states have used the labor of convicts, a predominantly white institution that came to include people of African ancestry. Convict slavery and chattel slavery co-existed. In Virginia, the state that had the largest number of enslaved Africans, inmates were declared “civilly dead” and “slaves of the State.”

It wasn’t until the early 1900s that states ended convict-leasing, the practice whereby wealthy farms or industrial business owners paid state prisons to use inmates to work on railroads and highways and in coal mines. In Georgia, for example, the end of convict-leasing in 1907 caused severe economic blows to several industries, including brick and mining companies and coal mines. Without access to cheap labor, many collapsed or suffered severe losses.

African American convicts working in the fields in a chain gang, 1903. 

Photo by: Photo 12/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Today, the United States has the largest prison population in the world, with an estimated 2.2 million incarcerated people. For many of them, the 13th amendment’s exception has become a rule of forced labor. Over 20 states still include the exception clause in their own state constitutions. Thirty-eight states have programs in which for-profit companies have factories in their prisons. Prisoners perform everything from picking cotton to manufacturing goods to fighting forest fires.

In a 2015 story, “American Slavery, Reinvented,” The Atlantic magazine described the consequences of refusing to work. “With few exceptions,” wrote the story’s author, Whitney Benns, “inmates are required to work if cleared by medical professionals at the prison. Punishments for refusing to do so include solitary confinement, loss of earned good time, and revocation of family visitation.”

In some cases, inmates are paid less than a penny an hour. And many who served their sentences leave prison in debt, having worked without the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act or the National Labor Relations Act.

In Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana and Texas, penal plantations exist where predominantly Black men pick cotton and other crops under the watchful eyes of typically armed white men on horseback. Some of the largest cotton production prisons are in Arkansas, helping to make the United States “the third-largest producer of cotton globally,” behind China and India.

Ironically, many of the prisons, like Louisiana State Penitentiary, or “Angola,” are located on former slave plantations.

Modern-day convict slavery

Late in 2021, on the 156th anniversary of ratification of the 13th Amendment of Dec. 6, 1865, U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, introduced a bill to eliminate the exception. Known as the Abolition Amendment, the resolution would “prohibit the use of slavery and involuntary servitude as a punishment for a crime.”

“America was founded on beautiful principles of equality and justice and horrific realities of slavery and white supremacy,” Merkley said in a statement, “and if we are ever going to fully deliver on the principles, we have to directly confront the realities.”

Based on our research, those realities are steeped in the mythology that America is a “land of the free.” While many believe it is the freest country in the world, the nation ranks 23rd among countries that uphold personal, civil and economic freedoms, according the Human Freedom Index, co-published by the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C.

For U.S. analysts who examine the nation’s constitutional pledges and its actions, the country is less free than often assumed.

Over time, those realities demonstrate a conflict in U.S. history, illustrated by the 13th Amendment. Some states approved the amendment in 1865. Others, like Delaware, Mississippi and New Jersey, rejected it. Free labor was at stake. America embraced the idea of freedom, but it was economically powered by slave labor. Today, the net result is that America is a nation with “4 percent of the planet’s population but 22 percent of its imprisoned,” according to Bryan Stevenson writing in The New York Times Magazine.

Some readers might be puzzled by our discussion of “slavery” in modern life. The Slavery Convention was an international treaty created in 1926, and it defined slavery as “the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership is exercised.” The “right of ownership” includes buying, selling, using, profiting, transferring or destroying that person. This legal definition of slavery has been upheld by international courts since 1926.

The U.S. government ratified this treaty in 1929. But in doing so it opposed “forced or compulsory labour except as punishment for crime of which the person concerned has been duly convicted,” according to the treaty. The wording of the U.S. government’s opposition is the same as the 13th Amendment. Sixty-four years after passing that amendment, the U.S. government affirmed the use of prisons for forced labor or convict slavery.

It is, then, unlikely the Abolition Amendment will become law despite the authority to do so granted by the second section of the 13th Amendment. A constitutional amendment would have to pass both the House and Senate by a two-thirds majority, then be ratified by three-quarters (or 38) of the 50 state legislatures.

Inmate firefighters prepare to put out flames in Simi Valley, California, on October 30, 2019. 

Photo by Mark Ralston/AFP via Getty Images

Interest by lawmakers in abolishing modern-day slavery is nothing new.

Back in 2015, President Barack Obama issued a proclamation to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the 13th Amendment’s passage. He praised the amendment for “the protections it restored and the lives it liberated,” but then conceded work still needed to be done to fully abolish all forms of slavery.

The interest in the 13th Amendment has also been widespread throughout popular culture. Films, books, activists and prisoners across the United States have for some time linked that amendment to what legal scholar Andrea Armstrong calls “prison-created slavery.”

But given the political realities and economic imperatives at play, free prison labor will persist in America for the foreseeable future, leaving in serious doubt the idea of American freedom – and abundant evidence of modern-day convict slavery.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Kwasi Konadu, Colgate University and Clifford C. Campbell, Dartmouth College.

Read more:

US prisoners’ strike is reminder how commonplace inmate labor is – and that it may run afoul of the law

Exploiting black labor after the abolition of slavery

States are putting prisoners to work manufacturing coronavirus supplies

India destroys houses of several Muslim figures after religious riots

Sun, June 12, 2022

Officials have ordered the demolition of houses of Muslims accused of prompting riots

Security forces in India have demolished the homes of several Muslim figures allegedly linked to riots triggered by derogatory remarks about the Prophet Mohammed.

The property owners in Uttar Pradesh were told to vacate their homes beforehand.

Muslims have been protesting after anti-Islamic comments made by two leading members of the governing BJP.

Police have arrested more than 300 people in connection with the unrest.

The remarks were made by BJP spokeswoman Nupur Sharma during a TV debate in May. The BBC is not repeating Ms Sharma's remarks as they are offensive in nature.

• Who is Nupur Sharma?

The comments incensed Indian Muslims and outraged more than a dozen Islamic nations. The head of the party's Delhi media unit, Naveen Kumar Jindal, was also expelled for sharing a screenshot of her offensive comment in a tweet.

Their comments - especially Ms Sharma's - led to protests in some states.

The chief minister of Uttar Pradesh state, Yogi Adityanath, then ordered the demolition of any illegal establishments and homes of people accused of involvement in riots there last week, the BJP's state spokesperson said.

One house demolished was that of a politician named Javed Ahmed, prominent English-language newspaper Hindustan Times said. His daughter, Afreen Fatima, is a prominent Muslim rights activist.

Properties of two more people accused of throwing stones after Friday prayers were also demolished in the state.

Mrityunjay Kumar, Yogi Adityanath's media adviser, tweeted a photo of a bulldozer demolishing a building and said: "Unruly elements remember, every Friday is followed by a Saturday."

There has been widespread condemnation of the demolition.

Critics say Ms Sharma and Mr Jindal's comments reflect the deep religious polarisation that the country has been witnessing over the past few years.

Hate speech and attacks against Muslims have risen sharply since the BJP came to power in 2014.

Why Muslim countries are quick at condemning defamation – but often ignore rights violations against Muslim minorities

Ahmet T. Kuru, Professor of Political Science, San Diego State University

THE CONVERSATION

Sun, June 12, 2022,

Supporters of a Pakistani religious group burn an effigy depicting the former spokeswoman of India's ruling party, Nupur Sharma, during a demonstration in Karachi, Pakistan. AP Photo/Fareed Khan

The Indian government finds itself in a diplomatic crisis following offensive remarks by the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson, Nupur Sharma, on national television about the Prophet Muhammad and his wife, Aisha. The BJP has suspended Sharma from the position, but that has not been enough to quell the crisis. Over a dozen Muslim countries, including Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, have condemned the Indian government and asked for a public apology.

This is just another incident of hate speech against Muslims, which has been rising in India since the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led BJP government came to power in 2014. The government has been criticized for several lynchings of Muslims by Hindu mobs with police indifference and judicial apathy over the past years. In 2019, the BJP passed a new citizenship law that discriminated against Muslims, and its Islamophobic attitudes recently encouraged some schools and colleges to impose a headscarf ban on students.

These discriminatory policies have a global significance because India has the world’s third-largest Muslim population, after Indonesia and Pakistan. Out of the estimated Indian population of 1.4 billion, about 210 million – 15% – are Muslim.

As a Muslim, I am aware of the deep reverence for Prophet Muhammad, and I understand Muslim individuals’ resentment. The reaction of Muslim governments, however, reflect their political regimes. As my book “Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment” explains, most Muslim governments are authoritarian and concentrate on condemning sacrilege against Islam – more than advocating to protect the rights of Muslim minorities abroad.

Aisha: a powerful woman

The recent Indian case focused on Aisha’s age when she married the Prophet. Aisha is one of the most important, vigorous and powerful figures in Islamic history. The favorite wife of the Prophet, she was the daughter of the Prophet’s successor and closest friend, Abu Bakr. She became a leading narrator of hadith – the records of the Prophet’s words and actions – the teacher of many scholars and a military leader in a civil war.

According to a hadith record, Aisha was 9 years old when she got married. Some Muslims accept this record and see it normal for a pre-modern marriage, whereas other Muslims believe that Aisha was either 18 or 19 years old by referring to other records.

It is not possible to know the true facts of Aisha’s age. As Islamic scholar Khaled Abou El Fadl stresses, “we do not know and will never know” them. Sharma thus used a single narration, while ignoring alternative Muslim explanations, in her remarks.

Prioritizing blasphemy, not human rights

This is not the first time that Muslim governments have reacted to defamatory actions against the Prophet. The long list of incidents includes Iran’s Supreme Leader Ruhollah Khomeini’s 1989 call on Muslims to kill novelist Salman Rushdie and the 2006 boycott of Danish products throughout the Middle East in reaction to a dozen cartoons published in a newspaper.

An interesting pattern is visible in Muslim governments’ attitudes: They are very vocal when it comes to the cases of verbal or artistic attacks on Islamic values, whereas they are generally silent about human rights violations against Muslim individuals.

Muslim individuals in India have complained about the violations of their rights for almost a decade, but Muslim governments did not show a noteworthy reaction to the BJP until this defamation incident.

Another example is China, which has been persecuting 12 million Uyghur Muslims for many years. No Muslim government showed any major reaction. Instead, these governments have focused on their material interests and disregarded how the Chinese state treats its Muslim minority.

This double standard can be explained by the widespread authoritarianism in the Muslim world. Out of 50 Muslim countries, only five are democratic. Most authoritarian governments in the Muslim world have blasphemy laws that punish sacrilegious statements and suppress dissenting voices. That these governments should demand the punishment of blasphemy and defamation from India or other non-Muslim countries follows from these policies.

Another characteristic of authoritarian Muslim governments is their own violations of the rights of religious and ethnic minorities. In Pakistan, these violations have targeted the Ahmadiyya, Shia, Hindu and some other religious communities, while in Iran, ethnic minorities, including Azerbaijani Turks, Baluchis and Kurds, faced discrimination in education and employment. A rights-based discourse abroad, therefore, would contradict these governments’ policies at home.

Authoritarianism in the Muslim world has tragic consequences for Muslim minorities in India and elsewhere. Muslim governments’ short-term, emotional reactions to some defamation cases do not help improve the conditions of Muslim minorities, who actually need a more consistent and principled support.

This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Ahmet T. Kuru, San Diego State University.

Read more:

• Beheading in France could bolster president’s claim that Islam is in ‘crisis’ – but so is French secularism

• Execution for a Facebook post? Why blasphemy is a capital offense in some Muslim countries

Largest Palestinian displacement in decades looms after Israeli court ruling
 

Palestinian Wadha Abu Sabha talks to her family, in Masafer Yatta

Sun, June 12, 2022
By Henriette Chacar

MASAFER YATTA, West Bank (Reuters) - Some 1,200 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank region of Masafer Yatta face the risk of forced removal to make way for an army firing zone after a decades-long legal battle that ended last month in Israel's highest court.

The ruling opened the way for one of the largest displacements since Israel captured the territory in the 1967 Middle East war. But residents are refusing to leave, hoping their resilience and international pressure will keep Israel from carrying out the evictions.

"They want to take this land from us to build settlements," said Wadha Ayoub Abu Sabha, a resident of al-Fakheit, one of a group of hamlets where Palestinian shepherds and farmers claim a historic connection to the land.

"We're not leaving," she said.

In the 1980s, Israel declared the area a closed military zone known as "Firing Zone 918". It argued in court that these 3,000 hectares (7,400 acres) along the Israel-West Bank boundary were "highly crucial" for training purposes and that the Palestinians living there were only seasonal dwellers.

"It has been a year of immense grief," said Abu Sabha, her voice breaking as she sat in one of the few tents left standing, lit by a single light bulb.

The communities in this part of the South Hebron Hills traditionally lived in underground caves. Over the past two decades, they have also started building tin shacks and small rooms above ground.

Israeli forces have been demolishing these new constructions for years, Abu Sabha said, but now that they have the court's backing, the evictions are likely to pick up.

Steps away, her family's belongings were reduced to a pile of rubble after soldiers arrived with bulldozers to raze some of the structures. She lamented the significant losses - the dwindling livestock even more than the destroyed furniture.

Much of the argument during the protracted case centered on whether the Palestinians who live across the area are permanent residents or seasonal occupants.

The Supreme Court concluded that the residents "failed to prove their claim of permanent habitation" before the area was declared a firing zone. It relied on aerial photos and excerpts from a 1985 book that both sides cited as evidence.

The book, titled "Life in the Caves of Mount Hebron", was authored by Israeli anthropologist Yaacov Havakook, who spent three years studying the lives of Palestinian farmers and shepherds in Masafer Yatta.

Havakook declined to comment and instead referred Reuters to his book. But he said he had tried to submit an expert opinion on behalf of the residents following a request from one of their lawyers, and was prevented from doing so by the Israeli defence ministry, where he was employed at the time.

INTERNATIONAL CRITICISM

The United Nations and European Union condemned the court ruling and urged Israel to stop the demolitions and evictions.

"The establishment of a firing zone cannot be considered an 'imperative military reason' to transfer the population under occupation," the EU spokesperson said in a statement.

In a transcript 

1981-07-12-ועדת-שרים-להתישבות-קטעים-מסטנוגרמה.pdf (akevot.org.il)  

of a 1981 ministerial meeting on settlements uncovered by Israeli researchers, then-Agriculture Minister Ariel Sharon, who later became prime minister, suggested the Israeli military expand training zones in the South Hebron Hills to dispossess the Palestinian residents of their land.

"We want to offer you more training zones," Sharon said, given "the spread of Arab villagers from the hills toward the desert".

The Israeli military told Reuters the area was declared a firing zone for "a variety of relevant operational considerations" and that Palestinians violated the closure order by building without permits over the years.

According to the United Nations, the Israeli authorities reject most Palestinian applications for building permits in "Area C", a swathe of land making up two-thirds of the West Bank where Israel has full control and where most Jewish settlements are located. In other areas of the West Bank, Palestinians exercise limited self-rule.

U.N. data also showed that Israel has marked nearly 30% of Area C as military firing zones. The designations have put 38 of the most vulnerable Palestinian communities at increased risk of forced displacement.

Meanwhile, settlements in the area have continued to expand, further restricting Palestinian movement and the space available for residents to farm and graze their sheep and goats.

"All of these olives are mine," said Mahmoud Ali Najajreh of al-Markez, another hamlet at risk, pointing to a grove in the near distance. "How can we leave?"

The 3,500 olive trees he planted two years ago - he counted each one - were beginning to bud.

"We will wait for the dust to settle, then build again," Najajreh told Reuters. "We would rather die than leave here."

(Reporting by Henriette Chacar; Editing by James Mackenzie and Mark Heinrich)

‘You do not have to settle anymore’: Record inflation keeps the Great Resignation rolling

Serah Louis

Sun, June 12, 2022, 

It’s been over a year since the American workplace turned upside down, with employees quitting en masse in search of more fulfilling jobs and flexible work arrangements.

But as inflation hits a 40-year high, stragglers have found yet another convincing reason to jump ship.

“It’s a worker’s market,” says Andrew Flowers, labor economist at job advertisement firm Appcast. “And this bargaining power, it means that, with high inflation, this is the time to either ask for a raise or to potentially find a better offer elsewhere.”

Another 4.4 million Americans quit their jobs in April, the latest numbers show, nearly unchanged from the month before and still among the highest levels in decades.

While job vacancies decreased, there remain almost two jobs available for every worker who’s looking.

With the rising cost of food, gas and everything else giving all Americans a pay cut, workers who haven’t yet made a move have every reason — and every opportunity — to act soon.

The window remains open for now

The consumer price index surged to a spectacular 8.6% in May from a year earlier, putting pressure on workers who would otherwise be happy with the status quo.

Globally, one in five employees is likely to switch jobs in the next year, with most leaving for a better salary, according to a recent survey by accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Over a third are planning to ask for a raise in the next year, though that number is significantly higher in the tech sector (44%) and lower in the public sector (25%).

“Employers know that quit rates are high. They know that job openings are plentiful. And so they know their employees can be choosier,” Flowers says.

The added pressure of rising prices means employers may consider proactively hiking wages to avoid losing employees. Wages and salaries in the private sector increased by 5% for the 12-month period ending in March.

“Employers have a really insatiable appetite at the moment to hire,” Flowers says.

However, he adds, it’s unclear how long the labor market will remain so tight, especially as the Federal Reserve raises interest rates to cool off the economy.

How to go about asking for a raise

Whether or not it’s a good time for you to request a raise can really depend on your industry and whether your organization is thriving, says Chelsea Jay, a career coach based in Lansing, Michigan.

The accommodation and food services and leisure and hospitality sectors have seen the highest quit rates, reports Harvard Business Review, while retail and non-durable manufacturing industries have experienced the most growth in their quit rates. Workers in professional and business services are also leaving in droves.

Flowers says it’s fair to bring up rising prices when asking for a raise, though Jay argues that shouldn’t be the focus of the conversation.

“You can talk about inflation — but more than inflation, I encourage professionals to talk about their skill set and what they have brought to the organization,” says Jay.

She recommends talking to your coworkers about your salaries and doing research within your company, industry, city, state and career level. It’s also a good idea to look into when your company typically gives out raises and bring an estimate to the table at that time.

Nearly half of workers who tried to renegotiate their salary last year were successful, a survey by the job search site FlexJobs found.

What if you can’t get a raise?

If your request is denied, consider renegotiating your benefits. You can look into a hybrid working arrangement or more paid time off, or ask your employer to pay for a professional development opportunity, like a certification course.

That said, Jay warns against relying on short-term handouts, like retention bonuses.

“It's a Band-Aid to cover up the bigger issue,” she says. “Companies don't give bonuses every single year. So if you are not happy with your salary, either you need to get a raise from them, or you need to move on to a company that is willing to pay you right.”

She adds that everyone’s priorities are different, and you need to determine what’s most important to you if you decide to seek work elsewhere. In your interview with a potential employer, ask about the company culture, leadership, expectations of your role and the benefits and perks you’re interested in.

“Don't settle. You're in a time where you do not have to settle anymore,” she says.

What can employers do to retain talent?

Employers may see higher retention when they promote from within, Flowers emphasizes.

“It's one thing to say, ‘Hey, I'm going to leave this job and get a 10% raise elsewhere.’ But if a worker sees that they have a future and that they can move up the ladder through internal mobility … then maybe they won't just go take the highest offer.”

Jay also advises employers to give quitting employees the space to be transparent about why they’re leaving in their exit interviews.

It’s important that companies actively respond to feedback by implementing new policies and making changes to avoid losing even more workers in the future.

“[The Great Resignation] really shone a light on the issues that corporate America and these companies are having when it comes to the way that they treat their employees and how they show value and how they show respect,” says Jay.

“So if anything, what it did for a lot of companies was made them realize, hey, we're slipping in these areas. We need to step our game up here.”

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.

Amid abortion debate, clinic asks: Who's caring for moms?

LEAH WILLINGHAM
Sun, June 12, 2022

JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — Miracle Allen used her last tank of gas to drive an hour and 15 minutes to the closest clinic that would care for her and her unborn baby.

Allen, 29, was four months pregnant when Hurricane Ida ripped through her Houma, Louisiana, community. She spent three nights in the remnants of a house with a torn roof and no electricity. Her car was all she had left. So Allen — along with her 6-year-old daughter, her mother and a niece — fled in it to the rural Mississippi town of Kosciusko, where family lives.

Her first priority was finding a doctor to check on her baby boy. But the lone local obstetrician splits her work between two rural counties and wasn't taking new patients. Allen couldn't find another doctor even within an hour's drive — certainly not one who'd take a patient without insurance or an ID, which was destroyed in her home by Ida.

Finally, a Jackson-area hospital that turned her away suggested the Sisters in Birth clinic. On that last tank of gas, she arrived in a panic. Would they see her? Had the stress of the storm affected her pregnancy? Where would she go if this place turned her away?

Almost all the mothers served at the clinic in Mississippi's capital are Black women without insurance, like Allen. Many haven’t been to a doctor for years, until they became pregnant and qualified for Medicaid. Most are at risk for conditions such as hypertension and heart disease. Nearly all have nowhere else to go.

Clinic CEO and founder Getty Israel says Mississippi leaders are failing these women every day. As state Republican officials spend time and resources trying to ban abortion and awaiting a ruling that could overturn Roe v. Wade, advocates say nothing is being done to support women who choose to give birth.

“We’re doing everything wrong,” Israel said. “Mississippi is pro-birth, but not pro-life. If we really are a pro-life state, we have to do more than try to end abortion and make sure that women are healthy.”




Overturning Roe v. Wade could affect some communities more than others

The expected Supreme Court ruling that could overturn the constitutional right to an abortion invokes strong reactions from people with varying viewpoints. Some medical experts say if the ruling allows states to ban abortion it could disproportionately affect the health of people in certain communities.

Mississippi has the highest infant death rate in the nation, and Black babies die at roughly twice the rate of white children, federal statistics show. Mississippi also ranks among states with the highest maternal death numbers, with Black women again disproportionately affected. And rural hospitals are closing at an alarming rate, leaving gaps in health care, while about 20 percent of Mississippi women are uninsured, according to census figures.

All these issues plagued Mississippi before the pandemic, but Israel and others said COVID-19 made matters worse, with overwhelmed hospitals and a flailing economy.

Israel opened her clinic amid the pandemic need, in June 2021. She wanted to teach patients, especially Black women who she's seen taken advantage of in the medical system, how to take control of their bodies and advocate for themselves.

Sisters in Birth is a midwifery clinic that provides education and care to pregnant patients — ultrasounds, prenatal vitamins, checkups with the nurse midwife and doctor on staff. But Israel also tries to focus on more than medical care; she said she takes a holistic approach to women's physical, social and emotional health.

The clinic's community health workers help create eating and exercise plans, meet with patients at home, and join them in the hospital for labor. Employees help with enrollment in Medicai d and community college. In particular, Israel wants Sisters in Birth to address any health disparities before patients — many of whom are at risk for complications given demographics and prior lack of access to care — give birth and offer them social support.

When Allen arrived, she was greeted by art of female activists on the comforting sea green walls: Toni Morrison, Dolores Huerta and Madonna Thunder Hawk. Magazines with Black women on the covers sit in front of colorful couches.

Staff members agreed to see Allen — a single mother and waitress who lost her job of 12 years during the pandemic — without insurance. They helped her submit a Medicaid application, set up exercise and nutrition plans, and offered her gas money to get home.

“I felt like I could finally breathe,” Allen said.

Once she reached month seven, Allen said thanks to Sisters in Birth, she'd already had more medical care than in her entire last pregnancy. Israel calls her on days when the clinic is closed to check in.

The stability has helped her transition to life in Mississippi — finding a place to live, replacing documents, enrolling for food stamps — all while pregnant.

“They know me by name when I walk in,” she said. “You don’t have to remind them who you are and what you’re going through.”

Now, Israel wants to expand — but she needs money to do it. With the help of Mississippi's only Black and Democratic congressman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, she is pursuing $3 million in federal money from the Community Project Funding program to open Mississippi’s first birth center. She imagines a place where Black women can give natural births and reclaim their agency.

Currently, there's a nurse midwife on staff — one of a handful of midwives in Mississippi. Despite shrinking numbers, there's a rich history of midwifery in southern states. For generations, most Black babies were delivered by midwives because of racist policies that barred Black women from hospitals. In the late 1950s and 1960s, midwives were pushed out of the industry as hospitals became desegregated and white physicians sought control over the birth market.

Israel wants to hire more midwives, for a total of four, and offer training. She also plans a cabin for women to stay so they're on site and supported before labor.

Although Sisters in Birth does not provide abortions — the clinic generally doesn't counsel women on them, either, as the focus is providing services to women who want to give birth — Israel expects that if abortion banned, she'll see an increase in patients.

“Poor women who are now pregnant, because they can’t get an abortion, will be looking for clinics like mine that don’t have a limit on the number of Medicaid patients they accept,” she said. “Support makes a difference, whether a woman wants to have an abortion or not.”

She wants to be able to support more women, and for them to have the opportunity to give birth at the center instead of at hospitals. There, Israel said she often sees doctors pushing inductions and cesarean sections that aren’t medically necessary. Federal data show Mississippi has the highest rate of c-sections in the U.S. Black women have experienced the highest c-section delivery rates in the country since the 1990s.

In 2018, a five-year study conducted by the federal government comparing birth centers with other forms of maternal birth care for women on Medicaid revealed a dramatic reduction of preterm, low-weight and cesarean births for patients at birth centers. The results showed a reduction in racial inequities — there were no differences by race for rates of cesarean birth and breastfeeding, for example — and Israel wants to replicate that for the women of Mississippi.

Yasmin Gabriel of Jackson said she sought out Israel's clinic because she wanted to have a woman of color in the room when she gave birth.

“So often, we just get ignored,” she said. “I wanted our babies to come into this world without stress, without me having anxiety, because of the fact that I’ve experienced other people not listening to our threshold of pain or listening to what we would desire.

“I just wanted to make sure that I had someone who looked like me who understood what I was going through."

Womens Clinic Mississippi

Dr. Felecia Brown, a midwife at Sisters in Birth, a Jackson, Miss., clinic that serves pregnant women, left, confers with Kamiko Farris, of Yazoo City, following use of a Doppler probe to measure the heartbeat of her fetus, Dec. 17, 2021. (AP Photo/Rogelio V. Solis)

Michigan doctor's mom died during childbirth after she couldn't get an abortion


Niraj Warikoo, 

Detroit Free Press
Sun, June 12, 2022,

When Fatima Basha became pregnant at the age of 34, she realized her body wouldn't be able to handle another child.

The mother of nine children in Syria had experienced a couple of miscarriages earlier, a stillbirth and also suffered from gastrointestinal problems that often left her weak and fatigued.

"She and my father knew that her body could not withstand the trauma of another childbirth," her eldest son, Dr. Yahya Basha, 76, of West Bloomfield, recalls. "I was about 16 at the time, and vividly remember my father confiding in me, saying their intent was to terminate the pregnancy."

In the 1960s, the mother of Dr. Yahya Basha died during childbirth in Syria. She and her husband wanted to get an abortion because of her health problems but were unable to. Basha speaks as he chokes back tears of his loss and the importance for a woman's right to choose Friday, June 3, 2022 at his offices in Royal Oak.

They visited several doctors to get an abortion, but she was unable to find one to perform the procedure, Basha said. Fatima soon died during childbirth in 1962, unable to survive the bleeding.

"Coming back from school, we were taken to the hospital," Basha said, weeping as he recalled seeing his mother dead on a hospital bed when he was 16 years old.

Decades later, the memory of his mother's death still haunts Basha and has compelled him to speak out in favor of abortion rights. When he read last month that Roe v. Wade may be overturned after a U.S. Supreme Court draft opinion was leaked, Basha said thoughts of his mother came flooding back.

"All the painful memories came out bursting," Basha said. "Like a bottle exploded in my brain."
'I must speak out'

Basha is a noted physician who founded Basha Diagnostics, a medical testing company headquartered on Woodward Avenue in Royal Oak that does about 100,000 tests a year with several offices in metro Detroit. He's also a prominent community leader in the Arab American and Muslim communities who often meets with elected officials in Michigan, visits the White House, and has often donated to candidates from both parties. Just within the past two weeks, he lunched with U.S. Rep. Haley Stevens, D-Waterford, at his Royal Oak office and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel visited him on a recent Friday.

Basha worries if the Supreme Court overturns the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion nationally, women like his mother will suffer.

"Women have to have a choice," Basha said. "The recent leak ... made me realize that I must speak out. What I want everyone to know, including my brothers and sisters in the Muslim community, is that we all must act to protect access to legal abortions in our state."

In the 1960s, the mother of Dr. Yahya Basha died during childbirth in Syria. She and her husband wanted to get an abortion because of her health problems, but were unable to. Basha speaks about his feelings of his loss and the importance for a woman's right to choose Friday, June 3, 2022 at his offices in Royal Oak.

Basha supports the ballot initiative in Michigan led by ACLU Michigan and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Michigan that would amend the state constitution to ensure reproductive rights in the state.

Overturning Roe v. Wade "is too much and too dangerous," Basha said. "Because my mother could not receive the abortion needed to save her life, we’ve all struggled to live out our lives without her. It left a hole in my heart that will never heal."

The son of a candy store factory who struggled to make a living, Basha immigrated 50 years ago to the U.S. for a medical residency after excelling in school in Syria. Since then, he has helped bring siblings and other relatives to the U.S., where there are about 30 medical doctors in the Basha family.

Basha said that while he is speaking out for a woman's right to choose, he also "respects religions greatly" and often is in dialogue with people of Muslim, Christian, Jewish and other faiths about abortion. He said he also respects families and notes that he has seven children of his own and thirteen grandchildren.

Basha's story also offers a perspective on abortion and the Muslim world at a time when some have made bigoted remarks. In the national discussion about abortion in recent months, there have been Islamophobic comments at times trying to link the views of conservatives in the U.S. to Muslims and their faith. On social media, phrases such as the "Texas Taliban" are used by some liberals to mock strict abortion laws in Texas. On the "Daily Show" last month, host Trevor Noah also made similar comparisons when talking about abortion, saying: "After all these years of the right screaming about sharia law, it turns out they were just jealous."

Noah's remarks and others like it were criticized by Muslim advocates who said it's wrong to target their religion on this issue.

Islamic clerics and experts note that Islam generally has a more liberal and nuanced view on abortion compared with the official views of the Catholic Church and evangelical Protestant groups.

The Vatican says life begins at conception and thus all abortions are not allowed. In Michigan, Catholic Church leaders are battling in court this year to preserve abortion restrictions under a 1931 law that could go back into effect if Roe v. Wade is overturned. In contrast, abortion is allowed in Islam in many cases, with different schools of thought offering varying perspectives. And local Muslim leaders have not been active in anti-abortion movements.

"A lot of the religious people, they are divided over the issue," Basha said.

Basha said that based on his understanding of his faith, abortion is allowed before a certain number of months during the pregnancy, according to three of the four main schools of thought within Sunni Islam, which he practices. The fourth school of thought allows abortion, but under a shorter time period, he said. Islam also allows for contraception use, unlike the Catholic faith. Other Muslim leaders in metro Detroit and experts have varying views.

In Islam, the issue of abortion is not "black and white, a yes or no answer," said Dr. Mahmoud Al-Hadidi, chairman of the Michigan Muslim Community Council. "It's decided case by case."

Al-Hadidi said he's speaking as a practicing doctor and a Muslim, but not as an Islamic leader or expert.

"In Islam, abortion is permitted under certain circumstances, depending on the state of the pregnancy and the health of the mother," he said.

Aborting for financial reasons is not permissible, he said.

"Most scholars agree that it is permissible in the first 30 to 45 days," Al-Hadidi said.

Al-Hadidi worries that the abortion issue is splitting the country and he hopes there can be a way for both sides to reconcile based on medical science.

"We should avoid both extremes and have a balance in our behavior toward this very critical issue," said Imam Mohammed Elahi, leader of the Islamic House of Wisdom in Dearborn Heights. "Generally speaking, we are against abortion, and we are for life. But there are exceptions."

Moreover, Elahi said, it's hypocritical for politicians who are pro-life, but then don't take action on issues such as gun violence and war.

Religious debates

Other religious communities in metro Detroit have also been wrestling with the issue of abortion. There are a variety of opinions within the faiths that reflect denominational and philosophical differences.

"Judaism is both 'pro-choice' and 'pro-life,'" said Rabbi Aaron Starr, spiritual leader of Congregation Shaarey Zedek in Southfield, the largest and oldest Conservative synagogue in Michigan. "When the mother’s life is determined to be at risk, then abortion is not a choice; in such a situation, abortion becomes an obligation. Protecting the mother’s life always takes precedence over preserving the fetus, until the child emerges. ... If the fetus poses no threat to the woman’s body, she is prohibited from aborting."

While some identify as anti-abortion in the Jewish community, they may still be supportive of the right to an abortion.

"Because protecting life is among the highest Jewish values, access to safe abortions is — for Jews — a moral and religious requirement," Starr said.

"Our community is very committed to separation of church and state," said Rabbi Asher Lopatin, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of metro Detroit/American Jewish Committee. "When human life begins is really a religious question."

In the 1960s, the mother of Dr. Yahya Basha died during childbirth in Syria. She and her husband wanted to get an abortion because of her health problems but were unable to. Basha speaks about his feelings of his loss and the importance for a woman's right to choose Friday, June 3, 2022 at his offices in Royal Oak.

Last month, the bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, the Right Rev. Bonnie Perry, and other community leaders, met with Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in Sterling Heights, where the topic of abortion was discussed.

"I do not believe that any one religion should be able to impart its views or its values on another group of people," Perry said, reiterating the views she expressed at the meeting. "Abortion should be safe, accessible and rare."

Other Protestants, such as those in the evangelical community or more conservative factions within mainline Protestantism, support the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

The Michigan Catholic Conference, which is the official public policy voice of the Catholic Church in the state, is battling Whitmer in court to preserve the 1931 state law banning abortion that may go into effect is Roe v. Wade is overturned. The law only allows abortion in cases when the life of the mother is threatened, but Nessel and experts have said that exception is written vaguely and could lead to a ban on all abortions.

Some candidates for governor, such as Garrett Soldano, who identifies as a proud Catholic on his campaign website, say abortion should be banned even in cases of rape.

But the views of many Catholics — as well as evangelicals, Muslims, Jews and people of other faiths — often differ from the views of leaders.

Almost half of Catholics, 48%, support abortion being legal, according to a 2018 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute. Among Muslims, it's 51%. For white evangelical Protestants, it's 31% and for Jews, it's 70%

Life in Syria

Dr. Basha's father, Mahmood Basha, was an orphan. Mahmood's dad died when he was 4 and his mom when he was a teenager.

He struggled while raising children with his wife, Fatima, but things started to improve after he opened a small business making candy.

They lived in Hama, a city in Syria that became known later for being largely destroyed by the Syrian government as it crushed an uprising in 1982.

The death of his mom led to their family being separated as the children were adopted by others.

"We were separated, cast far and wide," Basha recalled. "Along with losing our mother, we also lost the comfort of being with each other. It was a terribly difficult time for all of us."

His father died at about the age of 50 of a stroke.

"My father ... was devastated, and had a difficult time coping with the loss of the woman he loved deeply," Basha said.

Growing up, Yahya Basha thought he might go into business like his father, but he encouraged him to instead go into medicine, impressed with the doctors he encountered when he visited the American University of Beirut in Lebanon.

"After my mom's death, I focused on studying day and night," Basha said.

He did well on his exams and earned admission to a medical school in Damascus, from which he graduated.

Success in Royal Oak

In 1972, Basha immigrated to the U.S., working as a medical intern at Mount Carmel Mercy Hospital in Detroit and then completing his residency in radiology at Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak.

He worked several jobs as a radiologist in local hospitals before buying a struggling radiology practice in downtown Royal Oak in 1978.

Basha said he lost $200,000 in his first year. He decided to buy a small ultrasound machine, which he would bring to doctor's offices so patients wouldn't have to travel to another location. He founded Basha Diagnostics in 1980 and today the business has grown into a successful operation that administers X-rays, MRIs, ultrasounds and other tests, serving tens of thousand of patients a year.

In the 1960s, the mother of Dr. Yahya Basha died during childbirth in Syria. She and her husband wanted to get an abortion because of her health problems, but were unable to. Basha speaks about his feelings of loss and the importance for a woman's right to choose at his offices in Royal Oak, Friday, June 3, 2022.

Basha puts in long hours at his jobs, often working seven days a week. During the COVID-19 pandemic, his offices have been more busy than usual. In recent years, he developed prostate and kidney cancer and has high blood pressure.

Basha is active in supporting Arab American and Muslim groups across Michigan, donating to groups and speaking up on civil rights issues. He has been outspoken in support of attempts to bring democracy to Syria and also helping Syrian refugees.

He was known for supporting Republicans such as former Gov. John Engler and President George W. Bush, whom he would meet at the airport during presidential visits to Michigan. But he has also been supportive of Democratic politicians, especially in recent years, including U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who caucuses with Democrats, when he ran for president.

Standing on the fourth floor of his office in Royal Oak in front of an MRI machine, Basha is overcome with emotion as he recalls his mom.

"The whole thing is so painful," Basha said. "Even the thought of what we all went through all those years ago still overwhelms me with sorrow. The emotional pain of the loss remains so overwhelming."

Asked why he is now speaking out publicly about his mom's death and his support for abortion rights, Basha said it was because of the possibility of Roe v. Wade being overturned. Before, he thought that while there were some threats, the 1973 court decision would stand and ensure the right to choose.

"I’ve always avoided discussing it publicly, until now," Basha said.

"I’ve lived in a country where abortion is illegal, and have experienced firsthand the grief and hardship such a ban can cause," he said. "I came to America because of the freedom and opportunity this country offers. For the past 50 years, one of those freedoms has been for people to make their own choices regarding reproductive health, the kind of choice that could have saved my mother’s young life if it had been available to her.

Basha said he wants to "sound the warning of what others will face if we do not fight to protect all of our rights, including the right to reproductive freedom."

"As I can personally attest," he said, "it is literally a matter of life and death."


This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Michigan doctor recalls mom's death in childbirth amid abortion debate