Tessera
Folgen

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.

@fabioethics.bsky.social

associate professor of bioethics • immigration, public health ethics, crosswords • she/her • http://abortionpuzzles.com • views my own

360 Posts1864 Follower1026 Folgt
Dana Howard@thedanahoward.bsky.social · 4w ago

Finally submitted my OMB comment! You can do so here: www.regulations.gov/document/OMB... I used this comment app to help structure my comment and it was a breeze: ombcomment.netlify.app Also copy and paste the comment and send to your representatives: actionnetwork.org/letters/oppo...

Oppose OMB Proposal to Put ALL Federal Government Funding Decisions in the Hands of Political Appointees

On May 29, 2026, the Office of Management and Budget issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), OMB-2026-0034, Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance. The scope of this proposed regulation is...

actionnetwork.org

Elizabeth Lanphier@ethicselizabeth.bsky.social · 4w ago

As of almost 24 hours ago, over 98,000 public comments have been submitted in response to the OMB Proposed Rule that would upend the allocation of over a trillion dollars of annual federal funding. I just added mine. Since they are public, might as well post them here!

Dear Mr. Vought: I am writing as a scholar working within the humanities and academic medicine, and as a concerned citizen, community member, and parent, to provide comment on Proposed Rule: Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance (OMB-2026-0034; FR Doc. 2026-10817). The proposed rule would usher in sweeping changes to the allocation of over a trillion dollars in federal grants. This would impact not only our academic research enterprises, but also essential shared goods that are important to the well-being of all Americans, like our public schools, public roads, and public assistance programs for basic needs like food and housing. I am the parent of a child in a Title I public school. I am concerned about the impact of the proposed rule changes on my child’s school, and that of many other children across the country whose families rely on schools to provide trusted education, safety, and meals to our children daily. Proposed rules in Section § 200.300 that would prohibit activities the administration deems related to “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” undermines the very idea of Title I funding. As defined by existing policy, Title I is designed specifically so that all children have an “opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.” Equity is central to the role and function of Title I, as a matter of fairness and equal opportunity. If Title I funds are compromised, this would be a major loss to public schools in Ohio, where I reside, and where most children attend public school. Yet in Ohio the state budget will cover less than a third of public-school costs, already pushing a huge burden onto property owners to finance public education. Eroding Title I would only put further pressure on Ohio’s working middle-class property owners to fund public education, a public good that is owed to and expected of all children in the United States. Considerations of fairness and equality are core to my expertise and work as a philosopher working within an academic medical setting to support accessible, fair, and just healthcare delivery. I see every day the existing barriers to these goals. I am concerned that these proposed rules will deepen the gap in providing high quality healthcare to all Americans. Health and illness are non-partisan issues, experienced by all individuals, regardless of political affiliation, ideological views, or voting record. I am particularly concerned that provisions in Section § 200.300 and Section § 200.340 that prohibit funding “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” would disproportionately harm Americans served by rural hospitals that often treat those most excluded from healthcare access. These rural hospitals rely on federally funded programs like Medicaid that are specifically designed to address inequities in resources, including healthcare resources. Such facilities that function specifically to enhance equity, inclusion, and accessibility of healthcare would be vulnerable to the application of Section § 200.300. Under Section § 200.340, they could face discretionary termination of federal funding that keeps healthcare flowing to rural populations, effectively cutting off parts of the population from even emergency healthcare services, let alone the kinds of preventative and ongoing care necessary to keep healthcare costs low, and populations healthy. As a researcher and scholar, I am also concerned about Sections § 200.300 and § 200.340 as they relate to research and scholarship. The proposed revision indicates that Section § 200.300 is “intended to prevent discrimination on the basis of federally protected characteristics,” something already upheld by existing research ethics and regulations, which must adhere to anti-discrimination policies. Introducing the thinly defined concept of “Unlawful DEI” in Section § 200.300 creates unnecessary confusion about ac…I am also deeply concerned about Section § 200.205, which contradicts core principles of academic freedom by permitting political appointees, not expert peer-review, to guide funding decisions; Section § 200.218, which disallows federal funding of certain research methodologies, allowing ideology rather than expertise to inform research topics and frameworks; and Section § 200.461, which directly contradicts existing federal requirements that federally funded research be open-access by limiting the ability of federal awards to support open-access publishing fees. As a philosopher working within academic medicine, I work in interdisciplinary teams, collaborating on research that is not — and should not be — categorized narrowly as either basic research, applied research, or experimental development. Therefore, I am concerned that Section § 200.202(g), requiring such categorization of research awards, shows a fundamental misunderstanding of research and particularly how excellent and innovative research is produced. Mandating such misleading categorization would be a step in the wrong direction for advancing American achievement across all disciplines. My professional work within healthcare delivery and healthcare research affirms my belief that there could be improvements to how each of these is funded at the federal, state, and local levels. However, my experience also shows that these proposed changes would lead to certain harm, not helpful improvement. As a researcher I am concerned for the future of innovation, understanding, and intellectual and scientific progress. But as a parent, a community member, and a citizen, I am concerned for the ways in which these proposed changes will harm every aspect of our lives — from the healthcare we can receive, to the roads we drive on, to the education my own children and each of our children receive. Given these clear harms, I ask that the entire proposed rule OMB-2026-0034 be withdrawn. I look forward to your respo…
Elizabeth Lanphier@ethicselizabeth.bsky.social · 4w ago

Last year @fabioethics.bsky.social wrote a helpful piece on the International Journal for Feminist Approaches to Bioethics on Public Comments as advocacy that remains timely. Check it out here:

Bioethics and Public Notice-and-Comment In Federal Rulemaking

<p>In this essay by Rachel Fabi, Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education in the Center for Bioethics and Humanities at SUNY Upstate Medical University, Dr. Fabi provides a helpful explainer a...

fabnet.org

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.@fabioethics.bsky.social · last mo.

My new First Opinion piece in @statnews.com discusses the forthcoming birthright citizenship decision in Trump v. Barbara (and gives a little preview of one chapter of my still-being-written book about immigration and reproductive justice!) www.statnews.com/2026/06/23/b...

Ending birthright citizenship could be a public health disaster

If the Supreme Court upholds the executive order ending birthright citizenship, it could “have stark consequences at the intersection of bioethics and public health.”

statnews.com

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.@fabioethics.bsky.social · 2mo ago

I'm so proud of our These Puzzles Fund Abortion team and the puzzles we put out and the community that rallies around the abortion funds we support! Please consider donating to support this important cause — the fundraiser ends on Sunday! fund.nnaf.org/tpfa6

These Puzzles Fund Abortion@tpfa.bsky.social · 2mo ago

✨Editor* Spotlight✨ @fabioethics.bsky.social (she/her) is a crossword constructor and a professor of bioethics. She created TPFA as a form of praxis, putting her scholarly interest in reproductive justice into practice through fundraising for abortion access. (1/2)

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.@fabioethics.bsky.social · 4mo ago

I've had the privilege of working alongside Seçil for the past month at the Brocher Foundation in Switzerland as she's been putting the finishing touches on this book. I have learned so much from her about syphilis in the Ottoman Empire, and the history of Ottoman medicine in general!

Christos Lynteris@visualplague.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Something to look forward to: Seçil Yılmaz's book on the history of syphilis in the Ottoman Empire @stanfordpress.bsky.social www.sup.org/books/middle...

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.@fabioethics.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Really grateful for the experts over at @scotusblog.com and their community of commenters — at least we don't have to go through today's oral arguments alone <3 www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/oral...

Oral argument live blog for Wednesday, April 1

On Wednesday, April 1, we will be live blogging as the court hears argument in Trump v. Barbara, on the constitutionality of President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship. […]

scotusblog.com

Sean Marotta@smmarotta.bsky.social · 4mo ago

April Fools' pranks are getting and less and less believable. Like I'm seeing websites claiming that the government of the United States is going to argue in court today that the Fourteenth Amendment denies birthright citizenship to kids born here just because their parents didn't enter lawfully.

Rachel Fabi Ph.D.@fabioethics.bsky.social · 5mo ago

For those who have asked, I'm spending my sabbatical working on a book project on reproductive justice, immigration, and bioethics in the U.S. My book explores (among other things) advocacy against this long-standing and intentional pattern of inhumane treatment, abuse, and neglect. 1/5

The New York Times@nytimes.com · 5mo ago

Pregnant women who have been swept up in President Trump’s immigration crackdown have been held in detention centers as late as eight months into their pregnancies without adequate food or medical care, a New York Times examination found. nyti.ms/40QJ7wD