Update: Nursing moms are now eligible for accommodations! The ABIM has just posted its on its website, making nursing mothers eligible for additional break time and a private place to pump during any of the tests it administers. Thanks to ABIM for doing the right thing, and to Meghan for standing up for herself and fighting for the rights of others!
In September, the ACLU wrote a letter on behalf of Meghan McInerney, a medical doctor doing her fellowship in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, a sub-specialty of internal medicine. Dr. McInerney had been denied additional break time to pump breast milk during her pulmonary medicine licensing examination. She took the examination on Wednesday, November 12.
You wouldn't think that as a medical professional, I'd be asked to choose between the health of my child and the advancement of my medical career, but that's exactly the choice that was put before me.
I am a physician in my third and final year of sub-specialty fellowship training. I am also a first-time mother trying to make my way through the logistical and emotional challenges that come with working 50-70 hours per week and having an infant at home—while remaining committed to breastfeeding.
At the end of our training in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine we are required to take sub-specialty certifying exams, which are offered only once a year to all trainees in the country. This exam, which is administered by the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), is a grueling all-day test. After paying the $2,200 exam fee, I wrote to the ABIM to inquire about accommodations for breastfeeding mothers to express milk during breaks on the exam day.
I never anticipated how ABIM—a medical organization—would respond: "we give no accommodations to nursing mothers".
I wrote again to clarify that I was not asking for extra time to take the exam, but extra break time. Again, the response from the ABIM was that the time allotted in the 10 hour exam day should suffice. Their explanation was that as a nursing mother I am not considered a person with a disability, so I don't qualify for protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act. They added that they couldn't even guarantee that there would be a private place for me to pump.
Without the ability to pump, I would face engorgement and extreme discomfort, possible infection, or a diminished milk supply—not to mention not having enough food for my baby. Without the additional break time, I would have to choose between pumping and doing the things the rest of the test takers were able to do with their breaks—for example, eating, using the restroom, getting fresh air, or studying.
I was astounded by ABIM's response. First, how could a medical society take a position so antithetical to the medical evidence (The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends breastfeeding at least one year)? Second, where did the ADA come into this? I don't consider myself disabled and am not requesting accommodations as such. I am simply trying to do what I believe is best for my baby.
Equally shocking was some of the feedback I got from fellow physicians. While some supported me in challenging the ABIM's policy, others suggested I postpone the exam for a year, or even that I stop breastfeeding altogether. Is this what it means to be a working mother? Why should I have to choose between continuing to breastfeed and remaining on track with my career?
I decided I would not make that choice. Instead, I contacted the ACLU, which, along with a private attorney, sent a letter to the ABIM on my behalf, highlighting the fact that the ABIM's policy is discriminatory against women.
I am happy to report that last month the ABIM reversed its decision: They stated that they would allow me the additional break time I requested, and agreed to provide me with a room in which I could pump in private. And, they added, the ABIM will review its policy for nursing mothers.
Thanks to this change, when I took the exam earlier this week I was able to pump twice during the nine-hour test day. My experience made it clear how necessary this extra time was, as there is no way I would have had enough time without the extra break time provided.
The ABIM has done the right thing by not forcing me to choose between the health of my child and staying on track with my chosen career. I hope that they will take this one step further and put into place a policy that applies to all nursing mothers who will sit for the board exams they administer.
Click here for more information on ACLU's past campaigns to eliminate barriers for new moms entering the legal profession.
Learn more about breastfeeding rights and other civil liberties issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseOct 2024
LGBTQ Rights
+2 Issues
At Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender YouthAt Supreme Court, Tennessee Seeks to Expand Reach of Dobbs to Ban Health Care for Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON – In their brief defending the state’s ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti has asked the Supreme Court to expand its ruling overturning Roe v. Wade and allow the state to target transgender people’s autonomy over their own bodies, too. In U.S. v. Skrmetti, three Tennessee transgender youth and their families are challenging a state law that prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that are allowed for minors who are not transgender. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, the families argue that the ban violates their Equal Protection rights under the 14th Amendment. In the brief filed today, Tennessee relies on the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Whole Women’s Health in an attempt to justify its ban on gender-affirming health care for transgender people. The brief cites to Dobbs at least 10 times in sweeping arguments to justify government sex discrimination. “We’ve seen just how far extreme politicians will push to deny us our reproductive freedom, from banning abortion to threatening IVF to even threatening to put doctors in jail for providing emergency care, with deadly consequences for women’s lives,” said Jennifer Dalven, director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project. “The same politicians who are trying to control women have now set their sights on transgender people and their families and are trying to control their bodies and lives. Allowing politicians to continue down this road could hold severe implications for the freedom of all people to decide what is right for their own body.” Tennessee claims that their ban on gender-affirming care does not discriminate on the basis of sex even though it bans minors of one sex from accessing health care it allows to members of another sex. A transgender girl is barred from taking doctor-prescribed estrogen because Tennessee considers it “inconsistent” with her birth-assigned sex of male but a cisgender girl with a birth-assigned sex of female is permitted to take estrogen for any purpose including to affirm her female gender identity. “Since this Project’s founding by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, we have adamantly challenged efforts to limit who we can be based on our gender or ability to bear children,” said Ria Tabacco Mar, director of the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. “Tennessee’s attempt to limit who young people can become based on their sex shares a through-line with our nation’s history of subjugating women in the name of biology. The fight for each of us to live fully and authentically must include trans people. There is no ‘transgender’ exception to the U.S. Constitution.” In April 2023, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP sued the state of Tennessee to block S.B. 1, which prohibits medical providers from prescribing medical treatments to transgender youth, such as puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapies, that it exempts for minors who are not transgender. Following a decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, S.B. 1 took effect in July 2023. Since 2021, 24 states have banned hormone therapies for transgender youth. “Laws like Tennessee’s are not benign regulations of medical care; they are discriminatory efforts to exclude transgender people from the protections of the Constitution,” said Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “These bans represent a dangerous and discriminatory affront to the well-being of transgender youth across the country and their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.” -
Press ReleaseSep 2024
Women's Rights
Civil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion CareCivil Rights Groups Tell Federal Appeals Court that Protections for Pregnant Workers Cover Abortion Care
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Friday, a broad coalition of labor, workers’ rights, and gender justice organizations — led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the ACLU of Arkansas, and the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) — filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in support of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) regulations implementing the landmark Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), including the regulations’ explicit protection for workers who have abortions. The PWFA, which took effect last year, was the culmination of a decade-long campaign to secure access to reasonable accommodations for workers with temporary limitations caused by “pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions.” The EEOC’s regulations provide comprehensive guidance to workers, employers, and the courts about the statute’s range of protections, including job-protected time off for medical treatment and recovery. The amicus brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit supports the EEOC in a challenge by 17 red states that are trying to block the PWFA regulations’ coverage of accommodations for abortion-related care. In June, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissed the states’ challenge, and the states appealed to the Eighth Circuit. Their appeal includes a request that the Eighth Circuit issue a preliminary injunction of the regulations’ abortion provisions. The ACLU-NWLC brief details the federal law’s longstanding ban on discrimination against workers who obtain abortions – protection the PWFA intended to continue. The brief also documents the accounts of workers whose health and jobs were put at risk when their employers denied them accommodations, including time off, for abortion care. Such accounts illustrate the urgent need for clarity with respect to the PWFA’s coverage of abortion-related accommodations, and the devastating medical and financial consequences if such accommodations are denied. “Abortion has long been recognized as part of the full spectrum of workers’ pregnancy-related needs that are protected by the law, ” said Gillian Thomas, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Women's Rights Project. “The states’ challenge has created uncertainty, and seeks to deprive workers of essential, job-protected time off for abortion care, posing significant health risks and leading to forced pregnancies. The EEOC regulations are vital to ensure pregnant workers don't have to choose between their health and their jobs.” “Extremist politicians are demonstrating repeatedly their willingness to risk women’s health to advance their anti-abortion agenda,” said Gaylynn Burroughs, vice president for Education and Workplace Justice at the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC). “Let’s be clear: abortion care is pregnancy-related care, and stripping essential protections for abortion from the PWFA would endanger the health and economic security of pregnant workers.” “The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and its regulations provide a lifeline for workers who need accommodations during the most critical periods of their lives. Attempting to strip away these protections, particularly for abortion-related needs, is an affront to the rights and well-being of pregnant workers,” said John Williams, legal director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “All people in all aspects of pregnancy, including abortion, should be treated with the care and consideration they deserve. We stand firmly with the EEOC in defending these essential protections.” A copy of the brief can be found here. -
PodcastSep 2024
Women's Rights
How Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's SportsHow Sue Bird Is Supercharging Women's Sports
-
Press ReleaseJul 2024
Women's Rights
LGBTQ Rights
ACLU Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX RuleACLU Condemns House Measure Against Department of Education Title IX Rule
WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass H.J. Res. 165, a Congressional Review Act resolution disapproving of the U.S. Department of Education’s final Title IX rule providing guidance to schools on protecting students from sexual harassment, pregnancy discrimination, anti-LGBTQ discrimination, and other forms of sex discrimination. Mike Zamore, ACLU National Policy and Government Affairs Director, had the following response: “Today’s vote to completely repeal the Title IX rule takes a sledgehammer to the government’s ability to ensure that all students have the opportunity to learn free from sex discrimination and harassment. Stripping critical civil rights protections from LGBTQ students and students who are pregnant and parenting - as this resolution would do - is something that all members of Congress should strongly oppose. This is also not how Congress should act to protect the rights of students who face disciplinary action under Title IX because passing this resolution would prevent future rulemaking to ensure fair processes in school disciplinary proceedings.” The ACLU’s letter urging a “No” vote on H.J. Res. 165 can be found here: /documents/aclu-urges-no-vote-on-h-j-res-165 The ACLU’s statement on the final Title IX rule can be found here: /press-releases/155090