Pregnant women can now get a free RSV shot. What other vaccines do you need when you’re expecting?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
From today, February 3, pregnant women in Australia will be eligible for a free RSV vaccine under the National Immunisation Program.
This vaccine is designed to protect young infants from severe RSV (respiratory syncytial virus). It does so by generating the production of antibodies against RSV in the mother, which then travel across the placenta to the baby.
While the RSV vaccine is a new addition to the National Immunisation Program, it’s one of three vaccines provided free for pregnant women under the program, alongside ones for influenza and whooping cough. Each offers important protection for newborn babies.
The RSV vaccine
RSV is the most common cause of lower respiratory infections (bronchiolitis and pneumonia) in infants. It’s estimated that of every 100 infants born in Australia each year, at least two will be hospitalised with RSV by six months of age.
RSV infection is most common roughly between March and August in the southern hemisphere, but infection can occur year-round, especially in tropical areas.
The vaccine works by conferring passive immunity (from the mother) as opposed to active immunity (the baby’s own immune response). By the time the baby is born, their antibodies are sufficient to protect them during the first months of life when they are most vulnerable to severe RSV disease.
The RSV vaccine registered for use in pregnant women in Australia, Abrysvo, has been used since 2023 in the Americas and Europe. Real-world experience there shows it’s working well.
For example, over the 2024 RSV season in Argentina, it was found to prevent 72.7% of lower respiratory tract infections caused by RSV and requiring hospitalisation in infants aged 0–3 months, and 68% among those aged 0–6 months. This research noted three deaths from RSV, all in infants whose mothers did not receive the RSV vaccine during pregnancy.
This was similar to protection seen in a large multinational clinical trial that compared babies born to mothers who received this RSV vaccine with babies born to mothers who received a placebo. This study found the vaccine prevented 82.4% of severe cases of RSV in infants aged under three months, and 70% under six months, and that the vaccine was safe.
In addition to the maternal vaccine, nirsevimab, a long-acting monoclonal antibody, provides effective protection against severe RSV disease. It’s delivered to the baby by an intramuscular injection, usually in the thigh.
Nirsevimab is recommended for babies born to women who did not receive an RSV vaccine during pregnancy, or who are born within two weeks of their mother having received the shot (most likely if they’re born prematurely). It may also be recommended for babies who are at higher risk of RSV due to a medical condition, even if their mother was vaccinated.
Nirsevimab is not funded under the National Immunisation Program, but is covered under various state and territory-based programs for infants of mothers who fall into the above categories.
But now we have a safe and effective RSV vaccine for pregnancy, all pregnant women should be encouraged to receive it as the first line of prevention. This will maximise the number of babies protected during their first months of life.
Flu and whooping cough
It’s also important pregnant women continue to receive flu and whooping cough vaccines in 2025. Like the RSV vaccine, these protect infants by passing antibodies from mother to baby.
There has been a large whooping cough outbreak in Australia in recent months, including a death of a two-month-old infant in Queensland in November 2024.
The whooping cough vaccine, given in combination with diphtheria and tetanus, prevents more than 90% of whooping cough cases in babies too young to receive their first whooping cough vaccine dose.
Similarly, influenza can be deadly in young babies, and maternal flu vaccination substantially reduces hospital visits associated with influenza for babies under six months. Flu can also be serious for pregnant women, so the vaccine offers important protection for the mother as well.
COVID vaccines are safe in pregnancy, but unless a woman is otherwise eligible, they’re not routinely recommended. You can discuss this with your health-care provider.
When and where can you get vaccinated?
Pregnant women can receive these vaccines during antenatal visits through their GP or in a specialised antenatal clinic.
The flu vaccine is recommended at any time during pregnancy, the whooping cough vaccine from 20 weeks (ideally before 32 weeks), and the RSV vaccine from 28 weeks (before 36 weeks).
It’s safe to receive multiple vaccinations at the same clinic visit.
We know vaccination rates have declined in a variety of groups since the pandemic, and there’s evidence emerging that suggests this trend has occurred in pregnant women too.
A recent preprint (a study yet to be peer-reviewed) found a decrease of nearly ten percentage points in flu vaccine coverage among pregnant women in New South Wales, from 58.8% in 2020 to 49.1% in 2022. The research showed a smaller drop of 1.4 percentage points for whooping cough, from 79% in 2020 to 77.6% in 2022.
It’s important to work to improve vaccination rates during pregnancy to give babies the best protection in their first months of life.
We know pregnant women would like to receive information about new and routine maternal vaccines early in pregnancy. In particular, many pregnant women want to understand how vaccines are tested for safety, and their effectiveness, which was evident during COVID.
GPs and midwives are trusted sources of information on vaccines in pregnancy. There’s also information available online on Sharing Knowledge About Immunisation, a collaboration led by the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance.
Archana Koirala, Paediatrician and Infectious Diseases Specialist, University of Sydney; Bianca Middleton, Senior Research Fellow, Menzies School of Health Research; Margie Danchin, Professor of Paediatrics and vaccinologist, Royal Childrens Hospital, University of Melbourne and Murdoch Childrens Research Institute (MCRI); Associate Dean International, University of Melbourne, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Peter McIntyre, Professor in Women’s and Children’s Health, University of Otago, and Rebecca Doyle, Adjunct Research Fellow, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
WHO Overturns Dogma on Airborne Disease Spread. The CDC Might Not Act on It.
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The World Health Organization has issued a report that transforms how the world understands respiratory infections like covid-19, influenza, and measles.
Motivated by grave missteps in the pandemic, the WHO convened about 50 experts in virology, epidemiology, aerosol science, and bioengineering, among other specialties, who spent two years poring through the evidence on how airborne viruses and bacteria spread.
However, the WHO report stops short of prescribing actions that governments, hospitals, and the public should take in response. It remains to be seen how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will act on this information in its own guidance for infection control in health care settings.
The WHO concluded that airborne transmission occurs as sick people exhale pathogens that remain suspended in the air, contained in tiny particles of saliva and mucus that are inhaled by others.
While it may seem obvious, and some researchers have pushed for this acknowledgment for more than a decade, an alternative dogma persisted — which kept health authorities from saying that covid was airborne for many months into the pandemic.
Specifically, they relied on a traditional notion that respiratory viruses spread mainly through droplets spewed out of an infected person’s nose or mouth. These droplets infect others by landing directly in their mouth, nose, or eyes — or they get carried into these orifices on droplet-contaminated fingers. Although these routes of transmission still happen, particularly among young children, experts have concluded that many respiratory infections spread as people simply breathe in virus-laden air.
“This is a complete U-turn,” said Julian Tang, a clinical virologist at the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom, who advised the WHO on the report. He also helped the agency create an online tool to assess the risk of airborne transmission indoors.
Peg Seminario, an occupational health and safety specialist in Bethesda, Maryland, welcomed the shift after years of resistance from health authorities. “The dogma that droplets are a major mode of transmission is the ‘flat Earth’ position now,” she said. “Hurray! We are finally recognizing that the world is round.”
The change puts fresh emphasis on the need to improve ventilation indoors and stockpile quality face masks before the next airborne disease explodes. Far from a remote possibility, measles is on the rise this year and the H5N1 bird flu is spreading among cattle in several states. Scientists worry that as the H5N1 virus spends more time in mammals, it could evolve to more easily infect people and spread among them through the air.
Traditional beliefs on droplet transmission help explain why the WHO and the CDC focused so acutely on hand-washing and surface-cleaning at the beginning of the pandemic. Such advice overwhelmed recommendations for N95 masks that filter out most virus-laden particles suspended in the air. Employers denied many health care workers access to N95s, insisting that only those routinely working within feet of covid patients needed them. More than 3,600 health care workers died in the first year of the pandemic, many due to a lack of protection.
However, a committee advising the CDC appears poised to brush aside the updated science when it comes to its pending guidance on health care facilities.
Lisa Brosseau, an aerosol expert and a consultant at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy in Minnesota, warns of a repeat of 2020 if that happens.
“The rubber hits the road when you make decisions on how to protect people,” Brosseau said. “Aerosol scientists may see this report as a big win because they think everything will now follow from the science. But that’s not how this works and there are still major barriers.”
Money is one. If a respiratory disease spreads through inhalation, it means that people can lower their risk of infection indoors through sometimes costly methods to clean the air, such as mechanical ventilation and using air purifiers, and wearing an N95 mask. The CDC has so far been reluctant to press for such measures, as it updates foundational guidelines on curbing airborne infections in hospitals, nursing homes, prisons, and other facilities that provide health care. This year, a committee advising the CDC released a draft guidance that differs significantly from the WHO report.
Whereas the WHO report doesn’t characterize airborne viruses and bacteria as traveling short distances or long, the CDC draft maintains those traditional categories. It prescribes looser-fitting surgical masks rather than N95s for pathogens that “spread predominantly over short distances.” Surgical masks block far fewer airborne virus particles than N95s, which cost roughly 10 times as much.
Researchers and health care workers have been outraged about the committee’s draft, filing letters and petitions to the CDC. They say it gets the science wrong and endangers health. “A separation between short- and long-range distance is totally artificial,” Tang said.
Airborne viruses travel much like cigarette smoke, he explained. The scent will be strongest beside a smoker, but those farther away will inhale more and more smoke if they remain in the room, especially when there’s no ventilation.
Likewise, people open windows when they burn toast so that smoke dissipates before filling the kitchen and setting off an alarm. “You think viruses stop after 3 feet and drop to the ground?” Tang said of the classical notion of distance. “That is absurd.”
The CDC’s advisory committee is comprised primarily of infection control researchers at large hospital systems, while the WHO consulted a diverse group of scientists looking at many different types of studies. For example, one analysis examined the puff clouds expelled by singers, and musicians playing clarinets, French horns, saxophones, and trumpets. Another reviewed 16 investigations into covid outbreaks at restaurants, a gym, a food processing factory, and other venues, finding that insufficient ventilation probably made them worse than they would otherwise be.
In response to the outcry, the CDC returned the draft to its committee for review, asking it to reconsider its advice. Meetings from an expanded working group have since been held privately. But the National Nurses United union obtained notes of the conversations through a public records request to the agency. The records suggest a push for more lax protection. “It may be difficult as far as compliance is concerned to not have surgical masks as an option,” said one unidentified member, according to notes from the committee’s March 14 discussion. Another warned that “supply and compliance would be difficult.”
The nurses’ union, far from echoing such concerns, wrote on its website, “The Work Group has prioritized employer costs and profits (often under the umbrella of ‘feasibility’ and ‘flexibility’) over robust protections.” Jane Thomason, the union’s lead industrial hygienist, said the meeting records suggest the CDC group is working backward, molding its definitions of airborne transmission to fit the outcome it prefers.
Tang expects resistance to the WHO report. “Infection control people who have built their careers on this will object,” he said. “It takes a long time to change people’s way of thinking.”
The CDC declined to comment on how the WHO’s shift might influence its final policies on infection control in health facilities, which might not be completed this year. Creating policies to protect people from inhaling airborne viruses is complicated by the number of factors that influence how they spread indoors, such as ventilation, temperature, and the size of the space.
Adding to the complexity, policymakers must weigh the toll of various ailments, ranging from covid to colds to tuberculosis, against the burden of protection. And tolls often depend on context, such as whether an outbreak happens in a school or a cancer ward.
“What is the level of mortality that people will accept without precautions?” Tang said. “That’s another question.”
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Share This Post
-
The Oxygen Advantage – by Patrick McKeown
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
You probably know to breathe through your nose, and use your diaphragm. What else does this book have to offer?
A lot of the book is aimed at fixing specific problems, and optimizing what can be optimized—including with tips and tricks you may not have encountered before. Yet, the offerings are not bizarre either; we don’t need to learn to breathe through our ears while drinking a glass of water upside down or anything.
Rather, such simple things as improving one’s VO₂Max by occasionally holding one’s breath while walking briskly. But, he advises specifically, this should be done by pausing the breath halfway through the exhalation (a discussion of the ensuing physiological response is forthcoming).
Little things like that are woven throughout the book, whose style is mostly anecdotal rather than hard science, yet is consistent with broad scientific consensus in any case.
Bottom line: if you’ve any reason to think your breathing might be anything less than the best it could possibly be, this book is likely to help you to tweak it to be a little better.
Click here to check out The Oxygen Advantage, and get yours!
Share This Post
-
Topping Up Testosterone?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The Testosterone Drop
Testosterone levels decline amongst men over a certain age. Exactly when depends on the individual and also how we measure it, but the age of 45 is a commonly-given waypoint for the start of this decline.
(the actual start is usually more like 20, but it’s a very small decline then, and speeds up a couple of decades later)
This has been called “the male menopause”, or “the andropause”.
Both terms are a little misleading, but for lack of a better term, “andropause” is perhaps not terrible.
Why “the male menopause” is misleading:
To call it “the male menopause” suggests that this is when men’s menstruation stops. Which for cis men at the very least, is simply not a thing they ever had in the first place, to stop (and for trans men it’s complicated, depending on age, hormones, surgeries, etc).
Why “the andropause” is misleading:
It’s not a pause, and unlike the menopause, it’s not even a stop. It’s just a decline. It’s more of an andro-pitter-patter-puttering-petering-out.
Is there a better clinical term?
Objectively, there is “late-onset hypogonadism” but that is unlikely to be taken up for cultural reasons—people stigmatize what they see as a loss of virility.
Terms aside, what are the symptoms?
❝Andropause or late-onset hypogonadism is a common disorder which increases in prevalence with advancing age. Diagnosis of late-onset of hypogonadism is based on presence of symptoms suggestive of testosterone deficiency – prominent among them are sexual symptoms like…❞
…and there we’d like to continue the quotation, but if we list the symptoms here, it won’t get past a lot of filters because of the words used. So instead, please feel free to click through:
Source: Andropause: Current concepts
Can it be safely ignored?
If you don’t mind the sexual symptoms, then mostly, yes!
However, there are a few symptoms we can mention here that are not so subjective in their potential for harm:
- Depression
- Loss of muscle mass
- Increased body fat
Depression kills, so this does need to be taken seriously. See also:
The Mental Health First-Aid That You’ll Hopefully Never Need
(the above is a guide to managing depression, in yourself or a loved one)
Loss of muscle mass means being less robust against knocks and falls later in life
Loss of muscle mass also means weaker bones (because the body won’t make bones stronger than it thinks they need to be, so bone will follow muscle in this regard—in either direction)
See also:
- Resistance Is Useful! (Especially As We Get Older)
- Protein vs Sarcopenia
- Fall Special (How to Proof Yourself Against Falls)
Increased body fat means increased risk of diabetes and heart disease, as a general rule of thumb, amongst other problems.
Will testosterone therapy help?
That’s something to discuss with your endocrinologist, but for most men whose testosterone levels are lower than is ideal for them, then yes, taking testosterone to bring them [back] to “normal” levels can make you happier and healthier (though it’s certainly not a cure-all).
See for example:
Testosterone Therapy Improves […] and […] in Hypogonadal Men
(Sorry, we’re not trying to be clickbaity, there are just some words we can’t use without encountering software problems)
Here’s a more comprehensive study that looked at 790 men aged 65 or older, with testosterone levels below a certain level. It looked at the things we can’t mention here, as well as physical function and general vitality:
❝The increase in testosterone levels was associated with significantly increased […] activity, as assessed by the Psychosexual Daily Questionnaire (P<0.001), as well as significantly increased […] desire and […] function.
The percentage of men who had an increase of at least 50 m in the 6-minute walking distance did not differ significantly between the two study groups in the Physical Function Trial but did differ significantly when men in all three trials were included (20.5% of men who received testosterone vs. 12.6% of men who received placebo, P=0.003).
Testosterone had no significant benefit with respect to vitality, as assessed by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Fatigue scale, but men who received testosterone reported slightly better mood and lower severity of depressive symptoms than those who received placebo❞
Source: Effects of Testosterone Treatment in Older Men
We strongly recommend, by the way, when a topic is of interest to you to read the paper itself, because even the extract above contains some subjectivity, for example what is “slightly better”, and what is “no significant benefit”.
That “slightly better mood and lower severity of depressive symptoms”, for example, has a P value of 0.004 in their data, which is an order of magnitude more significant than the usual baseline for significance (P<0.05).
And furthermore, that “no significant benefit with respect to vitality” is only looking at either the primary outcome aggregated goal or the secondary FACIT score whose secondary outcome had a P value of 0.06, which just missed the cut-off for significance, and neglects to mention that all the other secondary outcome metrics for men involved in the vitality trial were very significant (ranging from P=0.04 to P=0.001)
Click here to see the results table for the vitality trial
Will it turn me into a musclebound angry ragey ‘roidmonster?
Were you that kind of person before your testosterone levels declined? If not, then no.
Testosterone therapy seeks only to return your testosterone levels to where they were, and this is done through careful monitoring and adjustment. It’d take a lot more than (responsible) endocrinologist-guided hormonal therapy to turn you into Marvel’s “Wolverine”.
Is testosterone therapy safe?
A question to take to your endocrinologist because everyone’s physiology is different, but a lot of studies do support its general safety for most people who are prescribed it.
As with anything, there are risks to be aware of, though. Perhaps the most critical risk is prostate cancer, and…
❝In a large meta-analysis of 18 prospective studies that included over 3500 men, there was no association between serum androgen levels and the risk of prostate cancer development
For men with untreated prostate cancer on active surveillance, TRT remains controversial. However, several studies have shown that TRT is not associated with progression of prostate cancer as evidenced by either PSA progression or gleason grade upstaging on repeat biopsy.
Men on TRT should have frequent PSA monitoring; any major change in PSA (>1 ng/mL) within the first 3-6 months may reflect the presence of a pre-existing cancer and warrants cessation of therapy❞
Those are some select extracts, but any of this may apply to you or your loved one, we recommend to read in full about this and other risks:
Risks of testosterone replacement therapy in men
See also: Prostate Health: What You Should Know
Beyond that… If you are prone to baldness, then taking testosterone will increase that tendency. If that’s a problem for you, then it’s something to know about. There are other things you can take/use for that in turn, so maybe we’ll do a feature on those one of these days!
For now, take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Alzheimer’s Causative Factors To Avoid
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The Best Brains Bar Nun?
This is Dr. David Snowdon. He’s an epidemiologist, and one of the world’s foremost experts on Alzheimer’s disease. He was also, most famously, the lead researcher of what has become known as “The Nun Study”.
We recently reviewed his book about this study:
…which we definitely encourage you to check out, but we’ll do our best to summarize its key points today!
Reassurance up-front: no, you don’t have to become a nun
The Nun Study
In 1991, a large number (678) of nuns were recruited for what was to be (and until now, remains) the largest study of its kind into the impact of a wide variety of factors on aging, and in particular, Alzheimer’s disease.
Why it was so important: because the nuns were all from the same Order, had the same occupation (it’s a teaching Order), with very similar lifestyles, schedules, socioeconomic status, general background, access to healthcare, similar diets, same relationship status (celibate), same sex (female), and many other factors also similar, this meant that most of the confounding variables that confound other studies were already controlled-for here.
Enrollment in the study also required consenting to donating one’s brain for study post-mortem—and of those who have since died, indeed 98% of them have been donated (the other 2%, we presume, may have run into technical administrative issues with the donation process, due to the circumstances of death and/or delays in processing the donation).
How the study was undertaken
We don’t have enough space to describe the entire methodology here, but the gist of it is:
- Genetic testing for relevant genetic factors
- Data gathered about lives so far, including not just medical records but also autobiographies that the nuns wrote when they took their vows (at ages 19–21)
- Extensive ongoing personal interviews about habits, life choices, and attitudes
- Yearly evaluations including memory tests and physical function tests
- Brain donation upon death
What they found
Technically, The Nun Study is still ongoing. Of the original 678 nuns (aged 75–106), three are still alive (based on the latest report, at least).
However, lots of results have already been gained, including…
Genes
A year into the study, in 1992, the “apolipoprotein E” (APOE) gene was established as a likely causative factor in Alzheimer’s disease. This is probably not new to our readers in 2024, but there are interesting things being learned even now, for example:
The Alzheimer’s Gene That Varies By Race & Sex
…but watch out! Because also:
Alzheimer’s Sex Differences May Not Be What They Appear
Words
Based on the autobiographies written by the nuns in their youth upon taking their vows, there were two factors that were later correlated with not getting dementia:
- Longer sentences
- Positive outlook
- “Idea density”
That latter item means the relative linguistic density of ideas and complexity thereof, and the fluency and vivacity with which they were expressed (this was not a wishy-washy assessment; there was a hard-science analysis to determine numbers).
Want to spruce up yours? You might like to check out:
Reading, Better: Reading As A Cognitive Exercise
…for specific, evidence-based ways to tweak your reading to fight cognitive decline.
Food
While the dietary habits of the nuns were fairly homogenous, those who favored eating more and cooked greens, beans, and tomatoes, lived longer and with healthier brains.
See also: Brain Food? The Eyes Have It!
Other aspects of brain health & mental health
The study also found that nuns who avoided stroke and depression, were also less likely to get dementia.
For tending to these, check out:
- Two Things You Can Do To Improve Stroke Survival Chances
- Depression, And The Mental Health First-Aid That You’ll Hopefully Never Need
- Behavioral Activation Against Depression & Anxiety
Community & Faith
Obviously, in this matter the nuns were quite a homogenous group, scoring heavily in community and faith. What’s relevant here is the difference between the nuns, and other epidemiological studies in other groups (invariably not scoring so highly).
Community & faith are considered, separately and together, to be protective factors against dementia.
Faith may be something that “you have it or you don’t” (we’re a health science newsletter, not a theological publication, but for the interested, philosopher John Stuart Mill’s 1859 essay “On Liberty“ makes a good argument for it not being something one can choose, prompting him to argue for religious tolerance, on the grounds that religious coercion is a futile effort precisely because a person cannot choose to dis/believe something)
…but community can definitely be chosen, nurtured, and grown. We’ve written about this a bit before:
You might also like to check out this great book on the topic:
Purpose: Design A Community And Change Your Life – by Gina Bianchini
Want more?
We gave a ground-up primer on avoiding Alzheimer’s and other dementias; check it out:
How To Reduce Your Alzheimer’s Risk
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
The Diet Myth – by Dr. Tim Spector
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Why are we supposed to go low-carb, but get plenty of whole grains? Avoid saturated fat, but olive oil is one of the healthiest fats around? Will cheese kill us or save us? Even amongst the well-informed, there’s a lot of confusion. This book addresses these and many such topics.
A main theme of the book is howa lot of it relates to the state of our gut microbiome, and what is good or bad for that. He also discusses, for example, how microbes predict obesity better than genes, and the good news is: we can change our microbes a lot more easily than we can change our genes!
In the category of criticism, he repeats some decades-old bad science in some areas outside of his field (i.e. unrelated to nutrition), so that’s unfortunate, and/but doesn’t detract from the value of the book if we keep to the main topic.
Bottom line: if you’d like to understand better the physiology and microbiology behind why dieting does work for most people (and how to do it better), then this is a great book for that.
Click here to check out The Diet Myth, and learn the science behind the confusion!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
In This Oklahoma Town, Most Everyone Knows Someone Who’s Been Sued by the Hospital
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
McALESTER, Okla. — It took little more than an hour for Deborah Hackler to dispense with the tall stack of debt collection lawsuits that McAlester Regional Medical Center recently brought to small-claims court in this Oklahoma farm community.
Hackler, a lawyer who sues patients on behalf of the hospital, buzzed through 51 cases, all but a handful uncontested, as is often the case. She bantered with the judge as she secured nearly $40,000 in judgments, plus 10% in fees for herself, according to court records.
It’s a payday the hospital and Hackler have shared frequently over the past three decades, records show. The records indicate McAlester Regional Medical Center and an affiliated clinic have filed close to 5,000 debt collection cases since the early 1990s, most often represented by the father-daughter law firm of Hackler & Hackler.
Some of McAlester’s 18,000 residents have been taken to court multiple times. A deputy at the county jail and her adult son were each sued recently, court records show. New mothers said they compare stories of their legal run-ins with the medical center.
“There’s a lot that’s not right,” Sherry McKee, a dorm monitor at a tribal boarding school outside McAlester, said on the courthouse steps after the hearing. The hospital has sued her three times, most recently over a $3,375 bill for what she said turned out to be vertigo.
In recent years, major health systems in Virginia, North Carolina, and elsewhere have stopped suing patients following news reports about lawsuits. And several states, such as Maryland and New York, have restricted the legal actions hospitals can take against patients.
But with some 100 million people in the U.S. burdened by health care debt, medical collection cases still clog courtrooms across the country, researchers have found. In places like McAlester, a hospital’s debt collection machine can hum away quietly for years, helped along by powerful people in town. An effort to limit hospital lawsuits failed in the Oklahoma Legislature in 2021.
In McAlester, the lawsuits have provided business for some, such as the Adjustment Bureau, a local collection agency run out of a squat concrete building down the street from the courthouse, and for Hackler, a former president of the McAlester Area Chamber of Commerce. But for many patients and their families, the lawsuits can take a devastating toll, sapping wages, emptying retirement accounts, and upending lives.
McKee said she wasn’t sure how long it would take to pay off the recent judgment. Her $3,375 debt exceeds her monthly salary, she said.
“This affects a large number of people in a small community,” said Janet Roloff, an attorney who has spent years assisting low-income clients with legal issues such as evictions in and around McAlester. “The impact is great.”
Settled more than a century ago by fortune seekers who secured land from the Choctaw Nation to mine coal in the nearby hills, McAlester was once a boom town. Vestiges of that era remain, including a mammoth, 140-foot-tall Masonic temple that looms over the city.
Recent times have been tougher for McAlester, now home by one count to 12 marijuana dispensaries and the state’s death row. The downtown is pockmarked by empty storefronts, including the OKLA theater, which has been dark for decades. Nearly 1 in 5 residents in McAlester and the surrounding county live below the federal poverty line.
The hospital, operated by a public trust under the city’s authority, faces its own struggles. Paint is peeling off the front portico, and weeds poke up through the parking lots. The hospital has operated in the red for years, according to independent audit reports available on the state auditor’s website.
“I’m trying to find ways to get the entire community better care and more care,” said Shawn Howard, the hospital’s chief executive. Howard grew up in McAlester and proudly noted he started his career as a receptionist in the hospital’s physical therapy department. “This is my hometown,” he said. “I am not trying to keep people out of getting care.”
The hospital operates a clinic for low-income patients, whose webpage notes it has “limited appointments” at no cost for patients who are approved for aid. But data from the audits shows the hospital offers very little financial assistance, despite its purported mission to serve the community.
In the 2022 fiscal year, it provided just $114,000 in charity care, out of a total operating budget of more than $100 million, hospital records show. Charity care totaling $2 million or $3 million out of a $100 million budget would be more in line with other U.S. hospitals.
While audits show few McAlester patients get financial aid, many get taken to court.
Renee Montgomery, the city treasurer in an adjoining town and mother of a local police officer, said she dipped into savings she’d reserved for her children and grandchildren after the hospital sued her last year for more than $5,500. She’d gone to the emergency room for chest pain.
Dusty Powell, a truck driver, said he lost his pickup and motorcycle when his wages were garnished after the hospital sued him for almost $9,000. He’d gone to the emergency department for what turned out to be gastritis and didn’t have insurance, he said.
“Everyone in this town probably has a story about McAlester Regional,” said another former patient who spoke on the condition she not be named, fearful to publicly criticize the hospital in such a small city. “It’s not even a secret.”
The woman, who works at an Army munitions plant outside town, was sued twice over bills she incurred giving birth. Her sister-in-law has been sued as well.
“It’s a good-old-boy system,” said the woman, who lowered her voice when the mayor walked into the coffee shop where she was meeting with KFF Health News. Now, she said, she avoids the hospital if her children need care.
Nationwide, most people sued in debt collection cases never challenge them, a response experts say reflects widespread misunderstanding of the legal process and anxiety about coming to court.
At the center of the McAlester hospital’s collection efforts for decades has been Hackler & Hackler.
Donald Hackler was city attorney in McAlester for 13 years in the ’70s and ’80s and a longtime member of the local Lions Club and the Scottish Rite Freemasons.
Daughter Deborah Hackler, who joined the family firm 30 years ago, has been a deacon at the First Presbyterian Church of McAlester and served on the board of the local Girl Scouts chapter, according to the McAlester News-Capital newspaper, which named her “Woman of the Year” in 2007. Since 2001, she also has been a municipal judge in McAlester, hearing traffic cases, including some involving people she has sued on behalf of the hospital, municipal and county court records show.
For years, the Hacklers’ debt collection cases were often heard by Judge James Bland, who has retired from the bench and now sits on the hospital board. Bland didn’t respond to an inquiry for interview.
Hackler declined to speak with KFF Health News after her recent court appearance. “I’m not going to visit with you about a current client,” she said before leaving the courthouse.
Howard, the hospital CEO, said he couldn’t discuss the lawsuits either. He said he didn’t know the hospital took its patients to court. “I had to call and ask if we sue people,” he said.
Howard also said he didn’t know Deborah Hackler. “I never heard her name before,” he said.
Despite repeated public records requests from KFF Health News since September, the hospital did not provide detailed information about its financial arrangement with Hackler.
McAlester Mayor John Browne, who appoints the hospital’s board of trustees, said he, too, didn’t know about the lawsuits. “I hadn’t heard anything about them suing,” he said.
At the century-old courthouse in downtown McAlester, it’s not hard to find the lawsuits, though. Every month or two, another batch fills the docket in the small-claims court, now presided over by Judge Brian McLaughlin.
After court recently, McLaughlin, who is not from McAlester, shook his head at the stream of cases and patients who almost never show up to defend themselves, leaving him to issue judgment after judgment in the hospital’s favor.
“All I can do is follow the law,” said McLaughlin. “It doesn’t mean I like it.”
About This Project
“Diagnosis: Debt” is a reporting partnership between KFF Health News and NPR exploring the scale, impact, and causes of medical debt in America.
The series draws on original polling by KFF, court records, federal data on hospital finances, contracts obtained through public records requests, data on international health systems, and a yearlong investigation into the financial assistance and collection policies of more than 500 hospitals across the country.
Additional research was conducted by the Urban Institute, which analyzed credit bureau and other demographic data on poverty, race, and health status for KFF Health News to explore where medical debt is concentrated in the U.S. and what factors are associated with high debt levels.
The JPMorgan Chase Institute analyzed records from a sampling of Chase credit card holders to look at how customers’ balances may be affected by major medical expenses. And the CED Project, a Denver nonprofit, worked with KFF Health News on a survey of its clients to explore links between medical debt and housing instability.
KFF Health News journalists worked with KFF public opinion researchers to design and analyze the “KFF Health Care Debt Survey.” The survey was conducted Feb. 25 through March 20, 2022, online and via telephone, in English and Spanish, among a nationally representative sample of 2,375 U.S. adults, including 1,292 adults with current health care debt and 382 adults who had health care debt in the past five years. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points for the full sample and 3 percentage points for those with current debt. For results based on subgroups, the margin of sampling error may be higher.
Reporters from KFF Health News and NPR also conducted hundreds of interviews with patients across the country; spoke with physicians, health industry leaders, consumer advocates, debt lawyers, and researchers; and reviewed scores of studies and surveys about medical debt.
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
