By John Q. Hosedrinker 
HuffPost, a news source dedicated to fact-based journalism, has been operating for two decades and remains committed to its mission. The publication is seeking support to continue its work. Reader contributions have been crucial in building and sustaining their newsroom, particularly during challenging periods. HuffPost hopes readers will continue to support its efforts.
Read the original article here
Red State Declares Emergency After Hitting Highest Infant Mortality Rate In The Country
The news that a “red state” has declared a public health emergency due to its soaring infant mortality rate, the highest in the nation, is a stark and sobering reality. It’s a situation that demands immediate attention, and it’s hard not to feel a sense of both sadness and a degree of “I told you so”.
This crisis, which led to an increase to 9.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in the state in 2024, paints a picture of systemic failures. The statistics are heartbreaking: nearly one out of every hundred babies dying before their first birthday is a figure reminiscent of a bygone era. This situation is even more troubling when we consider that the mortality rate for Black infants is more than double that of white infants in the same state.
The declaration of an emergency is, in itself, a significant move. It acknowledges the severity of the problem and signals an intent to mobilize resources. But as many commentators point out, it is a long way from having real-world effect. The true test will be in the actions that follow the declaration, actions that effectively address the root causes of this crisis. The most obvious is improving maternal health.
The factors that contribute to high infant mortality rates are complex and multifaceted. However, it is very clear that poor maternal health, lack of access to prenatal and postpartum care, and inadequate nutrition are all major contributing factors. These issues are often compounded by socioeconomic disparities, food deserts, and a shortage of healthcare professionals in rural areas. The closure of rural hospitals, which has been predicted due to Medicaid cuts, only exacerbates the problem by delaying emergency care.
It’s difficult not to see the policies of the past few years contributing to this current crisis. Restrictions on abortion, a near-universal conservative platform, have been shown to negatively impact the health of women and children. Conversely, universal progressive policies like paid parental leave, child tax credits, free daycare, education, and healthcare have been shown to promote the well-being of families. The political choices that states make have real-world consequences, and in this instance, those consequences are measured in infant lives.
The irony is palpable. The same political ideologies that often champion themselves as “pro-life” are also frequently associated with policies that undermine the very conditions that support life. There’s a clear disconnect between rhetoric and reality.
Mississippi is just the latest example of this. This is not a surprise, given the historical trends of the state. The data reflects a state where healthcare access is often limited, particularly for vulnerable populations. It’s a state where the same politicians are in charge and they have made several decisions that affect healthcare, education, and social programs for a long time.
One issue that is brought up repeatedly is the exodus of healthcare professionals, especially OB-GYNs, from states with restrictive abortion policies. This brain drain further strains already stretched healthcare systems and reduces access to essential care for pregnant women and infants. The closing of rural hospitals only makes the issue worse.
One thing that is becoming clear, as many commentators are pointing out, is that simply declaring an emergency is not enough. What’s needed are concrete actions that directly address the underlying issues. Better access to prenatal and postpartum care, stronger community support, more resources for mothers and babies, and investment in education and nutrition are all critical. Ultimately, the state has to decide if they care about the lives of women, children, and the babies they so claim to cherish.
The situation is not without its political undertones. Some commentators are quick to point out the irony of a “pro-life” stance seemingly not translating into policies that support the lives of the children. Others see it as a clear indication that the state will blame the wrong people to distract. Many are also pointing out the impact of policies like cuts to SNAP benefits and the creation of food deserts, which directly affect the ability of pregnant women to get proper nutrition.
The future of this state, and others like it, now rests on their commitment to providing better care for its citizens. Failure to address this crisis will not only continue to result in tragic loss of life, it will also be a damning indictment of the state’s priorities. The children of Mississippi and every other state deserve a safe, healthy start in life. And that takes more than just words; it takes a fundamental shift in priorities and a willingness to invest in the well-being of its most vulnerable citizens.