- ashlyn wilbanks Jones, OK, United States
- 6 supporters
- Created Dec 21, 2019
- Birth choices United States
- 10,044 supporters
- Created May 11, 2019
- Maternity Choices Australia
- 32,723 supporters
- Created Jan 28, 2019
- Dan Pitts Knoxville, TN, United States
- 2,358 supporters
- Created Oct 31, 2018
- Alissa Meddings Roseville, MI, United States
- 387 supporters
- Created Oct 14, 2020
- DIR/Floortime Coalition of California
- 2,565 supporters
- Created Sep 2, 2019
- Lisa Kelley Buckley, WA, United States
- 272 supporters
- Created Jan 7, 2022
- Shenendehowa Parents for Options
- 854 supporters
- Created Jul 25, 2020
- s e United Kingdom
- 2,100 supporters
- Created Dec 22, 2017
- Gabriela C Calgary, Canada
- 12,338 supporters
- Created Feb 17, 2020
Petition to would you rather have a guy ask you out in person or text?
would you rather have a guy ask you out in person or text?
Jones, OK, United States
Petition to Peacehealth
Save the Nurse Midwifery Birth Center!!
Keep safe and supportive Birth Center births an option in our community. Peacehealth is closing the only certified Nurse Midwifery Birth Center in our area, this includes the Midwifery practice as well as the Lactation program. There is no viable plan to continue providing Midwifery or Lactation services to the Eugene/Springfield OR area. This organization is vital to the health of our community! For more info follow Lane county friends of the birth center! ♥️Here is the Birth’s Centers GoFundme https://www.gofundme.com/save-the-nursemidwifery-birth-center-advocacy-fund?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_co_shareflow_m
Petition to Greg Hunt
Protect birthing choices for Australian women through funding reform
Australia’s maternity system is in crisis. Australian women’s basic human right to give birth where and with who they choose is under threat. The issues: 1. Australian women face limited affordable options for their pregnancy, birth and postnatal care. Only 8% of women experience continuity of care with a known care provider, which is known to improve outcomes for mothers and babies (1). Rural maternity facilities are being de-funded and are closing at an alarming rate, leaving some women no choice but to drive hundreds of kilometres to get to a hospital. Indigenous women lack accessibility to give birth on country.One third of women experience birth trauma (2) and somewhere between 1/5 and 1/8 of women leave birth with post-traumatic stress disorder (3). These women are traumatised by the care they are receiving in our broken maternity system. 2. The current maternity funding model is not structured in a way that allows funds to be appropriately allocated. It does not recognise additional services being provided by care providers (e.g. being on call, consultations via phone/skype, case review, pathology review, diagnostics etc.). It is difficult for hospitals to manage, reduces financial flexibility, reduces standardisation of evidence-based care and leads to higher costs and worsened patient outcomes (4). Many women who would choose to birth in a different environment or with different care providers are unable to do so due to restricted funding. This only adds to these negative birth experiences. 3. Australian Law requires care providers to have Professional Indemnity Insurance. Currently, no such insurance product exists for Privately Practising Midwives, so the government has allowed an exemption until the 31st of December this year. If the exemption isn’t extended, or if an insurance product is not made available, homebirth in Australia will become illegal, and from March 2019 there will be pregnant women who are at risk of not being able to birth at home. This is an emergency. Taking away women’s ability to birth at home with a midwife will result in more women choosing to freebirth with no medically trained staff present. The proposed solutions: 1. Continuity of midwifery carer Midwife-led continuity of care models demonstrate a number of benefits to women with no adverse effects. These benefits include a reduction in childbirth interventions, an increase in spontaneous vaginal births for women of low and increased risk (5) and a reduction in rates of caesarean sections in women of low risk (6). This model of care also demonstrates increased satisfaction for women when compared to other models of maternity care (7). By redirecting the funds allocated to Australian women for their antenatal, birth and postnatal care into their control, they can choose the model of care and care providers that are right for them (e.g. continuity of care with a midwife). By putting the choice in women’s hands, access to care options and affordability of those services will improve. It could potentially reduce birth trauma, increase access to care services, increase the utilisation of care services, and consequently increase women’s sense of satisfaction and control with their pregnancy, birth and postnatal experiences. It would also protect rural birthing services by ensuring that funding is allocated appropriately for any of the care that they provide. 2. Bundled funding reform Through these reforms, funding would be made easier for hospitals to manage, would allow financial flexibility (encouraging improved models of care and greater standardisation of evidence-based care), drive better service delivery and consequently lead to better patient outcomes and lower costs. The Independent Hospital Pricing Authority also states, “There is potential to better align pricing incentives across settings by introducing bundled pricing approaches” (8). 3. Extension to PII exemption Right now, the immediate need is for an extension to the homebirth insurance exemption. Until a suitable insurance product becomes available for privately practicing midwives, this is the only solution available. The National Strategic Approach to Maternity Services process is an absolute joke. Mothers and consumer groups from around the country have attended consultations and made their desire for bundled funding reform and a solution to the PII issue known, but the final draft document does not mention any of the above issues and proposed solutions. Politicians are caving in to lobbying pressure from the AMA announcing that the trend towards midwifery care is unsafe and that maternity care must remain obstetric led. We demand an urgent review of maternity funding model. We demand that the government listens to us – the birthing women of this country - once and for all. References: 1. Dawson et al., 2015Dawson, A.J., Nkowane, A.M. and Whelan, A., 2015. Approaches to improving the contribution of the nursing and midwifery workforce to increasing universal access to primary health care for vulnerable populations: a systematic review. Human resources for health, 13(1), p.97. 2. Boorman et al., 2014Boorman, R.J., Devilly, G.J., Gamble, J., Creedy, D.K. and Fenwick, J., 2014. Childbirth and criteria for traumatic events. Midwifery, 30(2), pp.255-261. 3. Schwab, Marth and Bergant, 2012; Schwab, W., Marth, C. and Bergant, A.M., 2012. Post-traumatic stress disorder post partum: the impact of birth on the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in multiparous women. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 72(1), p.56.Dekel, Stuebe and Dishy, 2017Dekel, S., Stuebe, C. and Dishy, G., 2017. Childbirth induced posttraumatic stress syndrome: a systematic review of prevalence and risk factors. Frontiers in psychology, 8, p.560. 4. IHPA, 2015. 5. Begley et al., 2011; Hartz et al., 2013; Sandall et al., 2015) 6. McLachlan et al., 2012 7. Sandall et al., 2015 8. IHPA, 2015
Maternity Choices Australia
Petition to Tennessee VAlley Authority Board of Directors, Dan Pitts
TVA Retirees Misled About Their Medicare Choices
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), a federal agency, terminated its over-65 retirees' health plan in 2017 and directed about 14,400 retirees to a new TVA-sponsored retiree health plan administered by Via Benefits (formerly known as OneExchange). From its inception, TVA retirees reported problems concerning the new over-65 retirees’ health plan. Retirees cited grossly inflated rates, coercion, inaccurate information, and misleading information about their options to purchase new plans. In violation of Medicare law, TVA retirees were improperly instructed that they ‘must” enroll through Via Benefits by December 31, 2016 or face a lapse in coverage that could last a year. TVA has never notified retirees that this information was false and a violation of Medicare laws. Around 14,400 retirees enrolled through Via Benefits during this time, and many are now stuck in Via Benefits’ high-priced plans with no way out unless we help them. Some retirees may be paying an extra $1,000 or more per year for Via Benefits’ plans - which include no extra benefits over other plans with identical benefits – a total waste of money. Hopefully, this petition will help shine a light on the abuse of these trusting seniors and the resulting inflated rates they are paying for Via Benefits’ plans. TVA Did Not Notify/Explain Retirees’ Rights as Required by Medicare Law. During the transition to Via Benefits, TVA retirees were never informed, as required by law, that Medicare regulations guaranteed them the right to purchase plans through any agent or broker who offered plans in their area. Under the law, no insurers could refuse to issue TVA retirees a plan or charge more because of pre-existing health conditions. Often, these local agent/brokers offered plans at much lower rates than the plans available through Via Benefits – and yes, the plans had identical benefits. Instead of complying with the law, TVA improperly instructed retirees that they “must” transition to Via Benefits’ plans and that failure to do so by December 31, 2016 would result in a “lapse” of coverage which could last for a year. In addition, retirees were not notified that Medicare law allowed them 63 days after termination of their former TVA plan to purchase plans from any agent or broker – that law allowed them until March 3, 2017 to enroll without penalty. Retirees Were Falsely Informed That Via Benefits’ Plan Rates Were “Competitive” or “Lowest Allowed” and that Medicare Had Approved the Rates. Via Benefits told TVA and retirees that their plans were reviewed and approved by Medicare and their rates were competitive or the “lowest allowed” by Medicare. Medicare does not review/approve plans or rates and it is a violation of Medicare law to tell potential enrollees that Medicare approved a plan or its rates. As a result of this misleading/ false information and failure to provide retirees explanations of their rights, thousands of trusting TVA retirees needlessly purchased their new plans through Via Benefits, many at very high rates - some may have paid rates up to 87% higher than plans with identical benefits from a local agent or broker. As a result, some TVA retirees may end up paying an extra $20,000 ($40,000 for a couple) for plans purchased through Via Benefits, for plans that have identical benefits to the less expensive plans available for local agents/brokers. After 2017, TVA Began Complying with Medicare Laws – Too Late For Those Retirees Who Enrolled for the 2017 plan year. According to anonymous sources, TVA’s Office of General Counsel advised TVA leadership that information provided retirees during the 2017 transition to Via Benefits contained several instances of misleading information and that TVA should refrain from advertising to its retirees that Via Benefits’ rates were competitive. In addition, options were discussed to remedy the financial damages to retirees who enrolled in Via Benefits during this time. TVA now informs its retirees who are newly eligible for Medicare that they are free to enroll in Medicare plans from local agents or brokers and are not required to enroll in Via Benefits’ plans. In addition, TVA informs retirees they have 63 days after their former plan ends to enroll in a new plan. Apparently, TVA leadership thought it was unwise to continue with their entrenched position that no laws were violated and that Via Benefits’ rates were competitive. It is a positive sign that TVA is now complying with Medicare law, but that does not help those retirees who were pressured in 2017 to buy Via Benefits’ plans. Thousands of those retirees are stuck in the over-priced plans they bought then, with no existing way out – some may have already needlessly paid an extra $6,000 ($12,000 for a couple) for those plans over the past 5 years. Do you know any retirees that would like a $6,000 or $12,000 refund from TVA and a new opportunity to enroll in plans with truly competitive rates? How Can You Help? Under Medicare law, if a person was coerced, misled, or provided false information about their Medicare plan, they are eligible for a Special Enrollment Period. It is obvious TVA retirees were pressured with false or misleading information about plan rates and their options to buy their new plans, and were not notified of and explained their Medicare rights. Consequently, Medicare could declare a Special Enrollment Period for affected TVA retirees. A new Special Enrollment Period would give affected retirees access to truly competitive plans, which they were denied in 2017. Let’s pull together to help these retirees by signing this petition. We will continue to make sure the TVA Board and the Health and Human Services Inspector General are fully briefed on this issue.
Knoxville, TN, United States
Petition to Fraser School Board
Parents For Choices!
… being mandated to choose for a whole school year.Don’t let them take our choices away! We ask they … allow for a choice now and an additional choice for the rest of the year. With these choices it will …!! Please hear our voices and do the right thing! Give us two choices!! …
Roseville, MI, United States
Petition to Gavin Newsom
Autism Treatment Choices for Children and Families!
… patient... SB 163 ensures that families and doctors will have choices! …
DIR/Floortime Coalition of California
Petition to Kim Schrier, Patty Murray, Jay Inslee, Washington State Senate, Washington State House, Attorney General, Merrick Garland, Bob Ferguson, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Choices for children
Family courts should be required to give children stuck in a joint custody situation a choice in which household they live. Many people incorrectly believe children get to choose where they live at a certain age, but that is only true in some states. Many states are operating on the assumption that the abusive parent’s rights are more important than the children’s right to safety, or the safe parent’s right to not be abused. By ten years old, children have the ability to communicate where they feel safe, and courts should be required provide for their safety above all other factors. Studies have repeatedly shown that abusive parents use children as pawns to continue to harass and control the lives of the safe parent. These studies also show that family courts repeatedly refuse to hear evidence or look at abusive patterns, resulting in children being abused until their 18th birthday. In fact, courts often punish the safe parent for asking for help, and give custody fully to the abusive parent. A chance for children to choose could have prevented, among other things, my youngest child from enduring a femur break this week, which could potentially leave him crippled for life. Because his voice has been ignored, he was left unsupervised with a known violent person while in the custody of his other parent. My children have been literally crying for help to escape the abuse for four years, but have received NO help from anyone, including school employees who are mandatory reporters, counselors, and judges. The cycle of Domestic Violence will only end when children’s voices are heard so they can finally escape the abuse.
Buckley, WA, United States
Petition to Shenendehowa Board of Education, Dr. L. Oliver Robinson, shenendehowa central school district
Support Reopening Choices for Shenendehowa
The Shenendehowa Central School District has released its reopening plans for the 2020/2021 school year. The current plan has no option for families that desire full time remote instruction. While we recognize the need or desire of some families to send their children back full-time, each family is unique. Shenendehowa is a diverse community and a one-size fits all approach will not work during a global pandemic with serious health risks. As a community, we implore the Shenendehowa School District to offer a full time remote learning option. An option takes nothing away from in-person learning. Instead it increases the safety of all students and educators by cutting down on the numbers in the classrooms each day as well as ensuring each student can continue to receive the high-quality education Shenendehowa offers. Sign below if you support expanding the learning options for our Shenendehowa families while keeping all of our students enrolled in the schools they have come to love so much.
Shenendehowa Parents for Options
Petition to episode
No gem choices in Episode user stories
This petition has ended.
Petition to Calgary City Council
Petition to City Council to Respect the Choices and Fundamental Freedoms of Individuals.
… healthcare and counseling choices available to other Calgarians. For example, the bylaw would … identity, we support the freedom of all people to make voluntarily choices about their sexual and gender … Council to ban abusive and coercive practices, while: 1. Respecting the voluntary choices of…
Can't find what you're looking for? Build support for an issue you care about.