This week on the NAWL podcast, host and NAWL member Maria Di Lorenzo is joined by fellow member Angelina Whitfield and special guest Sandi Johnson from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) for a powerful and timely conversation on the issue of non-consensual intimate exams. Together, they delve into the historical background of these medical practices, the current legal and regulatory landscape, and their implications for patient care. The discussion also highlights how the medical community is responding, recent legislative efforts aimed at reform, and RAINN’s ongoing advocacy to protect patient rights and promote systemic change. Tune in to learn how you can be part of the movement to defend bodily autonomy and drive meaningful reform.
This week on the NAWL podcast, host and NAWL member Maria Di Lorenzo is joined by fellow member Angelina Whitfield and special guest Sandi Johnson from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) for a powerful and timely conversation on the issue of non-consensual intimate exams. Together, they delve into the historical background of these medical practices, the current legal and regulatory landscape, and their implications for patient care. The discussion also highlights how the medical community is responding, recent legislative efforts aimed at reform, and RAINN’s ongoing advocacy to protect patient rights and promote systemic change. Tune in to learn how you can be part of the movement to defend bodily autonomy and drive meaningful reform.
To donate to RAINN: https://give.rainn.org/a/pelvic-exams
For a copy of the RAINN memo on this and other issues: https://rainn.org/policy-updates
To see what the laws in your state are for unauthorized intimate exams: https://rainn.org/articles/nonconsensual-practice-pelvic-exams
To contact Sandi Johnson at RAINN sandij@rainn.org
Read more about nonconsensual intimate exams here.
Bios:
Sandi Johnson is the Senior Legislative Policy Counsel for RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network), where she advocates for legislation and polices on a federal and state level in support of survivors of sexual violence. She worked over twenty years as a prosecuting attorney in Utah, primarily focusing on crimes of violence, including homicide, automobile homicide, organized gangs, and sexual violence. She worked on the Criminal Model Jury Instructions Committee for the State of Utah and is currently a Victim Rights Chair for the Fourth Judicial District. In addition to her courtroom experience, she served as a member of the Crime Victim Reparations and Assistance Board for the Utah Office for Victims of Crime, and was a member of the Board for the Salt Lake Valley Victim Emergency Fund. She was an instructor for the Utah Prosecution Council, serving as faculty for the Sex Crimes Investigations and Basic Prosecutor courses, and was an adjunct professor at the S.J. Quinney College of Law. She received her J.D. in 2002 from the University of Utah College of Law. She graduated from the University of Utah in 1998 with a Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and a certificate in criminology.
Angelina Whitfield’s practice spans complex antitrust litigations and sensitive government investigations at the state, federal, and international levels. She has served as a partner in a global law firm, at an antitrust boutique, and in the Illinois Attorney General's antitrust bureau. Her expertise encompasses a wide range of industries, including intellectual property, consumer electronics, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, fashion, hearing aids, and video/tabletop games. She specializes in dynamic industries like digital platforms, online gambling, cryptocurrency, and cannabis. In law school, she clerked for the Library of Congress and the Missouri Public Services Commission (utilities). She also advised various biotech startups. She is a vehement advocate against the practices of nonconsensual pelvic exams and child marriage. As a deaf person, Angelina is a proud wearer of hearing aids. In her free time, she enjoys publishing science fiction, painting with oils, and gardening superhot peppers, poisonous plants, and heirloom roses. She received her J.D. from the University of Missouri-Columbia and her B.A. from Truman State University.
Maria Di Lorenzo is an experienced General Counsel and legal executive with over three decades of experience working in private practice, corporate, and nonprofit sectors. Her expertise spans a range of practice areas including general corporate, Board governance, compliance, litigation, regulatory, transactional, and nonprofit legal affairs. Currently, she serves as General Counsel for both the Chicago History Museum, and Erikson Institute.
Beyond her professional roles, Maria is deeply committed to civic and professional engagement. She's serves on her local Public Library Board and on the Board of Police and Fire Commissioners. Maria is also an active member of NAWL and serves on the Annual Meeting Host Committee. As a deaf person, Maria is an advocate for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community, serving on the Board of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Bar Association (DHHBA), where she Chairs the Advocacy and Engagement Committee and Co-Chairs the Development Committee. Maria is a proud recipient of a cochlear implant and also mentors cochlear implant candidates as part of a global knowledge-sharing and peer support network.
Maria earned her B.A. in Psychology from Seattle University, summa cum laude, and her J.D. from the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. Licensed to practice in Illinois and New York, she balances her professional and civic commitments with family life, cherishing time and laughter with her husband and four children.
Jess Atkinson: Hello, and welcome back to the NAWL Podcast, conversations to help you thrive in the legal profession. The views and opinions expressed in this episode of the NAWl Podcast may or may not reflect those of NAWL, the hosts, or participants. Unless otherwise indicated, the hosts and participants are speaking for themselves personally, and not for any firm, employer, or any other organization. This podcast is for educational purposes only, and does not constitute and should not be considered legal advice. This week, NAWL member and host Maria Di Lorenzo is joined by fellow NAWL member Angelina Whitfield and Sandi Johnson, a representative from the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (or RAINN for short), for a vital discussion on the practice of non-consensual intimate exams. Together, they examine the historical context, current legal landscape, and the widespread impact of these violations on patients across the country. The conversation also addresses the medical community’s response, legislative developments, and RAINN’s ongoing advocacy to uphold patient rights and promote systemic reform. Stay tuned to learn more about how you can take meaningful action to protect bodily autonomy.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Good day. My name is Maria Dilorenzo. I am general counsel of the Chicago History Museum, and general counsel and corporate secretary at Ericsson institute. Our topic today on the NAWL podcast is bodily autonomy and informed consent: confronting non-consensual, intimate exams. With me today is Angelina Whitfield and Sandy Johnson. Angelina and Sandy, would you please introduce yourselves to our audience?
Angelina Whitfield: Hi, my name is Angelina Whitfield. I am an attorney whose practice has included complex antitrust litigations and sensitive government investigations at the global levels. Prior to retirement, I served as a partner in a global law firm at an antitrust boutique and in the Illinois Attorney General's office at the Antitrust bureau. My pronouns are she/her and I'm excited to collaborate with RAINN as ending non-consensual intimate exams is one of my deepest passions.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Thank you, Angelina. And Sandy?
Sandi Johnson: My name is Sandy Johnson. I'm the senior legislative policy counsel for RAINN. I use she/her pronouns. I have been a attorney since 2002, and for most of that time I've worked as a prosecuting attorney, focusing on violent crimes. For the last 2 years I have been working at RAINN on public policy team. RAINN is the nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization. We are best known for the national sexual assault hotline, where we receive over 27,000 contacts a month. But we also have a policy team which we call our small but mighty policy team. We have 5 people on our policy team, where we cover both Federal and State legislation. We are active in technical assistance for legislators and members of Congress, where we advise them on bills, on language, and then we support the passage of legislation that is helpful to survivors of sexual violence including most recently on the Federal level, the Take it Down Act and then on the state level, we're involved in many different types of legislation, including trying to eliminate statute of limitations for sexual violence, trying to provide immunity for victims who come forward for any charges related to drugs or alcohol that they may have used during a sexual assault, and different issues that relating to supporting survivors. So that's where I work and I'm really glad to be here and have this discussion.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Thank you, Angelina and Sandy for those introductions. And a quick note before we begin. This episode contains content that may be distressing, including discussions of nonconsensual pelvic exams, intimate exams, and the broader issue of medical procedures performed without the patient's informed consent. These are difficult but critical conversations that shine a light on violations of bodily autonomy, and the urgent need for change. We share this podcast to raise awareness, accountability, and advocate for patients rights. Please listen with care and know that your well-being comes first. To start off our questions, Angelina, can you tell us how you first became aware of this issue?
Angelina Whitfield: So I want to start by saying that what we're talking about today is intimate exams, and an intimate exam is a medical procedure where a healthcare provider examines a person rectum or a reproductive organs. And so when we talk about non-consensual exams in this podcast, we aren't talking about exams that are medically necessary or related to the underlying procedure that requires anesthesia. We're talking about involuntary intimate exams that are performed under anesthesia without a patient's informed consent, including exams that are performed during unrelated operations without patient's awareness or permission. So about a year ago, I became aware of this issue when I read an article about a Utah woman who had undergone stomach surgery. She learned afterwards that she had received, as part of that procedure, an unrelated pelvic exam, because the operating team saw that she was due for a pap smear. She was a sexual assault survivor, and she was very distressed by this, both because she felt it wasn't medically necessary and because she hadn't consented beforehand. So upon reading this, I wanted to learn more about the scope and justifications for this practice of performing intimate exams on anesthetized patients, and I never do anything halfway. So I personally interviewed physicians, academics, authors, women's health organizations, and nonprofits across the U.S. to understand this issue. I'm thrilled to collaborate with RAINN because they've achieved the most progress in this area.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Thanks, Angelina. And can you also provide a brief history of the practice? And what is the stated justification for this?
Angelina Whitfield: Historically, it's long been standard practice not to obtain a patient's consent before conducting these types of examinations. One justification for this practice is that patients are implicitly consenting to intimate exams when they're visiting a teaching hospital. Another is that consent for one procedure encompasses consent for any additional exams. Some physicians even think that they are providing a free service, that a patient would otherwise have to pay for like a pap smear. However, it's not clear in those circumstances that the results of a unconsensual or non-consensual exam would ever be recorded in a patient's files. And we're going to talk about data later on in this podcast. The most prevalent justification for this practice is education for medical students and trainees. Now it is important to have repeated hands-on experience to master the delicate skills that are required for these types of exams. But in the context of consent any educational benefit of these exams is undermined by both the performance of the exam and the lack of informed consent. So with anesthetized patients, muscles are relaxed, and that makes it easier for physicians and medical students to examine the body physically, examine organs. But with conscious patients, the medical students typically learn how to listen and respond to patient feedback. You know the “Ouch!” It really doesn't serve anyone's interest if we train physicians to perform exams in a way that is uncomfortable for patients, or in a way that disregards the importance of consent. Another factor here is that anyone who has undergone this knows that these are not comfortable exams, and given that discomfort of this type of exam and of the original procedure that requires anesthesia, an intimate exam that's performed once by one physician differs from an exam that's performed by several physicians in one visit. It also is an increased risk to be under anesthesia for any longer than necessary, and surgery aftercare may differ. Patients can prepare for and understand the cause of physical discomfort in an area that's not related to their operation if they have an understanding beforehand of the exam that's about to be performed. Importantly, I want to add, most patients would consent to an intimate exam for the purpose of medical training for students if they're asked about it beforehand. So one study stated that 72% of women expect to be asked for permission before an exam is conducted under anesthesia, and 62% say that they would consent if they were asked.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: So I think there may be some, Angelina, who may question, how prevalent is this practice? So can you give us a sense of just how broad is this practice? And then also, does this affect all patients, regardless of gender, or just exactly who does this affect?
Angelina Whitfield: So historically as I noted. It's long been standard practice not to obtain explicit consent before conducting these types of intimate exams. So we don't really have numbers to indicate how many have been performed nationwide without consent. But we do have regional studies that suggest that this is not an uncommon practice. For example, 90% of American medical students in a recent survey had performed a medical exam on an anesthetized patient. 61% of medical students who had performed an intimate exam on an anesthetized patient reported doing so without the patient's explicit consent. And there was a later study at the University of Oklahoma that found that a large majority of medical students there had performed intimate exams on gynecological surgery patients, and that nearly 75% of these women had not consented to the exam beforehand. These are numbers that we've gotten from schools where involuntary intimate exams are outlawed, so we can only assume that those numbers are higher in states where it is not. As for who it affects, we don't know how many exams have been performed. We have anecdotal and other data that suggests that they are performed, but intimate exams are performed across all genders. It impacts everyone who undergoes a procedure that involves anesthesia or is a patient at a hospital. It also affects, in a different way of course, the medical students and providers who perform these exams. These are people who seek out this field because they want to help others, and medical students want to feel comfortable performing procedures on patients and feel certain of consent. So communication about this topic goes both ways in protecting and creating that physician-patient relationship that's so valuable.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: So it sounds like, not only is there trauma or potential trauma to the patient, but the way you've described this, that the medical student is potentially a victim of trauma if they're having to undergo the training that involves performing these types of exams when they know there hasn't been informed consent given.
Angelina Whitfield: You know I don't know that I would use the word trauma. What I would say is that many medical students may feel that they can't say no, that they need to perform these exams, even when they're uncomfortable, because they're being supervised by medical providers who are grading them. And often they're somewhat divorced from the intake process and from the administrative process where the patient goes and signs a lot of this paperwork. But to the extent that you are a medical student who is performing this intimate exam and trying to learn if you feel that you haven't gained explicit or implicit consent. It makes it very difficult to do your job, and it produces a great feeling of discomfort that really does impact not only your relationship with your education, but your relationship with the patient.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Thanks for that background, Angelina. And I'd like to pivot toward the current state of the law around this practice and ask you, Sandy, what is the state of the law around this practice? And is this practice allowed under State and Federal laws?
Sandi Johnson: Yeah, thanks for the question. So one of the things, again to emphasize, is what we're talking about here is primarily medical students who, during a surgery for something that has nothing to do with an intimate area, are asked to perform an intimate exam for learning or educational purposes. And what you have to keep in mind is, for these victims, it's not just usually one student, it's usually multiple students. And so one after another, they're doing these practice exams. So when we go into States, one of the first things that we're told is, well, this is already criminal, because clearly this is touching an intimate area without consent. But unfortunately, most criminal laws don't outlaw this practice. For example, in the Federal system they have a criminal law for sexual abuse. If you touch with your hand, or with an instrument, an intimate area without consent, but it requires an extra intent on the person doing the touching, that they do it for a arousal or a sexual purpose, or with intent to humiliate or harass the victim. And these students don't have that intent. These students, as Angelina mentioned, they think perhaps they're doing a service for these victims and and giving them, you know, an examination or a pap smear that maybe not going to be charged for. And so on the Federal level, there's no criminal charge that you can go forward under, and it's similar for State laws. Most State laws, especially when it comes to touching with a hand or with an instrument, usually require an intent on behalf of the person doing the touching that it be for sexual purposes, or that it be to harm the patient. And that's just not the case in these types of exams. Even in those States where there's not that extra intent, practically speaking, prosecutors would not charge that case. In one State where we were advocating for legislation, the language was essentially a strict liability that if you touched an intimate area and you did it without consent, that that was sexual assault by instrument. And I contacted the prosecutor there to ask them about “what about a situation where you had a medical provider doing this?” And the prosecutors said in their decades of experience they had never had a case that was referred to them where it was a medical provider that wasn't doing it for sexual purposes. So even where the laws don't have a sexual purpose in the law, practically speaking, the criminal law does not protect patients against these types of exams. The other area where we look at the law around this practice is the practice of medicine, and usually under the regulation of the practice of medicine or licensure for medical providers. In 3 States, it is a crime to perform these exams. One state, Iowa specifically, just has flat out forbidden these types of exams. They do not allow any type of a teaching exam. The other 2 States, it is tied to consent. So when it comes to the practice of medicine, the Federal Government does not regulate the practice of medicine generally. That is something that's left to the States. The health and human services can regulate medicine in terms of what they require in order to receive Medicare or Medicaid. And what is in place is that there has to be informed consent, and there has to be documentation of that in the medical record. Last year in April of 2024, in response to the growing alarm that these practice exams were being conducted without the consent of patients, HHS issued guidance in terms of what is still required to receive those funds, and they made it explicitly clear that these types of unauthorized exams would cause a forfeiture in funding because you are not getting specific, informed consent of the patient. So that was really important because, although it isn't regulating the hospitals or the providers or the students, it made it really clear, going back to the fundamental principle that informed consent is what is necessary. In terms of on the State level, currently, right now, 28 States have some sort of legislation regulating these exams, and some of these were passed more than a decade ago, and amongst the 28 States, they do it in a variety of ways. They have certain requirements, some of them have little to no requirements. And so, as we're going through at RAINN, what we do is we identify those States where there's no legislation, and then we also are kind of ranking those States that have legislation to see where we can go in and improve that legislation, to really focus on the survivor and the patient, because that is what medicine is focused on, and that is what we are focused on is informed consent by the patient.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: Sandy, can you clarify, in which states this practice is allowed?
Sandi Johnson: Yeah. So I'm not going to read all 28 States. That would take a little bit of time. But what I will do is, I will put a link in the show notes. So if you want to find out if your State has a law and what that law says, I'll put a link to a map of the States about which States have a law and kind of how we've coded it, and it'll have a link to the actual statute. And then, if you still have questions, you are always welcome to reach out to me directly. Again, I'll put my contact information, and we can go through, and I can talk to you about what the laws are currently in your state.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: And Sandy, what is the position of the medical community and organizations, such as the American Medical Association, on this issue?
Sandi Johnson: So overall informed consent is a fundamental ethical principle in medicine, and the reason for that is, it upholds patients’ autonomy and their integrity. As Angelina mentioned before that trust between patient and caregiver. And so going on that premise, that fundamental principle of informed consent, the American Medical Association, under their code of ethics, have specifically stated that physicians should inform the patient that students or trainees will participate in any procedure before that procedure is undertaken. Now, the AMA doesn't specifically refer to these exams, but it does emphasize informed consent. And so many people who've commented and written on this opinion on the medical ethics have determined that if you perform an exam on a patient without their consent, that it is absolutely a violation of their ethical obligations. The American College of Obstetrician and Gynecologists, or “ACOG”, as I have learned a lot of people call it, they've issued an opinion directly on these exams back in 2011, where they stated that exams that are offered for no personal benefit and performed for teaching purposes should only be performed with specific informed consent of the patient prior to the examination. Similarly the Association of American Medical Colleges, clear back in 2003, issued a press release, stating that performing these types of exams without the informed consent of the patient is unethical and unacceptable. So every organization that is asked about it, even if they don't specifically address these intimate examinations, they will always emphasize informed consent on part of the patients.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: And Sandy, what initiatives is RAINN undertaking to combat this issue?
Sandi Johnson: Well, the first thing that we're trying to do is just education. One of the things that, as we noted, sexual assault and sexual violence is underreported just in general. But when it comes to these types of exams, it's really concerning about how underreported it is because the patients are anesthetized. They are unaware that this examination is happening, and really the only way they're becoming aware of it is if they're inadvertently told by a provider afterwards. Because these are medical exams that are just for teaching purposes, they're not being put into the medical records. And so, as Angelina mentioned before, you know, maybe a patient wakes up, and they have discomfort, or maybe, for I know, in one example a patient was told that she was on her period, and she was wondering how these physicians knew that because she was not there for anything that would have involved a pelvic exam. And so it's educating, you know, right now, in terms of the underreporting where we're learning about the prevalence is by asking students. And one of the things about students is in a recent survey, they asked students who had performed these pelvic exams and over 90% of these students didn't even know what those state laws were surrounding these pelvic exams or these intimate exams. And so not only is it the general public is unaware that these things are happening. The students themselves are unaware of what the laws are, the doctors are likely unaware what their obligations are. So one of the first things is just educating wherever we can about the practice, what's happening, and that it's a real thing. After that, this last year, what we did is we put together a memo where we describe the problem and the issue, and then we go through and offer legislative ideas on language of what you can do to put into the bill. And we put together a model bill. If a legislator wanted to introduce legislation around this, we then sent that out to legislators in every State, and we got responses back and from legislators saying, “we didn't even know that was a thing. Absolutely, we want to pass legislation for this.” And so that's one of the first things is just education. That's one of the reasons why we appreciate being able to come on this podcast is to spread this information as far and wide as we can, because this is an issue, and it is affecting patients and and survivors every day. Then we are actively lobbying. So in those States where bills are being introduced, we go to those States, we meet with legislators, we are appearing at committee hearings and testifying on behalf of the legislation. Right now a lot of legislators are out of session and so they're holding what are called interim sessions. We're going to those interim sessions and just educating the legislators themselves on why, this is an issue, and why it is so important to emphasize informed consent anytime we're talking about a person's body. We're sending letters of support in those States where we can't actively lobby and working with survivors. There are states where we have victims where this has either happened to them or they're aware of somebody this has happened to, and they want to take up the legislation. And we're able to provide them with support by giving them the memo, providing talking points and different things of that sort. You know, mentioned that HHS guidance earlier. Part of that is, we participated prior to that guidance being issued. We met with HHS to explain the problem and really bring the survivor and the patient perspective. Because I think when a lot of times when this issue gets raised, the first thing people are focusing on is the doctors and the students and what we are always emphasizing is the survivors and the patients and from their perspective and what we need to do to protect and help them.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: So as far as these efforts that you outlined, Sandy, the education, the lobbying, legislative efforts, how would you describe the progress that you have made thus far?
Sandi Johnson: I mean, I think we're making progress. I mean, anytime right now. We have 28 states where victims are able to have those protections. But that means we have that many states that don't. And so, you know, I'm I'll consider a success when every State has a law, and when every medical student and hospital and doctor all recognize the importance of informed consent, and none of these exams are being performed without informed consent. But the fact that you know right now, six States currently have active legislation, which means that six more States that have a possibility of protecting survivors in those States. And there are eight states that within the last two years tried to introduce legislation that failed, and some of them for policy reasons, some of them just for procedural reasons. So I think the fact that even in the last two years we've had this much activity on it, I think we're making progress. I think it's great that we're getting more and more articles that are coming out by researchers. You know, before it was, you'd get one research project and a survey maybe every couple of years. Now there's one that just came out from a year and a half ago surveying students showing this is still happening. But we're making progress in the States. But I think now it really is making the hospitals want to take active steps to protect the patients. Because once the hospitals start making that the policy, then it's no longer a question between the doctors and the students of whether or not the students should be deciding. It’s the hospitals and the facilities absolutely making clear that it has to be informed consent. So I think that's where we need to make more progress because the burden shouldn't be on the patient, and the burden shouldn't be on the students. The burden should be on those people who are in power, and can make this practice stop.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: That sounds like raising awareness on all fronts and becoming transparent on the issue, are really key here. So, turning to you, Angelina, for our listeners as they hear all of this content, can you provide some proactive steps that patients who are receiving medical services can take to avoid being subjected to this practice? And, secondly, how can we work to put an end to this practice altogether?
Angelina Whitfield: So I’m happy to answer that. I actually think there are several ways that are within our control as patients. The first is, talk to your healthcare providers. Ask them how they handle consent around this area. What are their hospital policies? Be clear with them that this is a concern that you have, because that does tend to linger in a practitioner's mind. Before you have a procedure that involves anesthesia, discuss with your operating team. What is the scope of the procedure? What does that entail? Who is going to be involved in it? In states where it is not outlawed yet, consider sending an email before the surgery to avoid confusion. That's one way that you can can try to be clear and take a proactive step. Another way you can take a proactive step is to incentivize good behavior. If you are asked for consent, properly informed, tell your medical provider that you appreciate it. Tell them that this is exactly the process you want to be followed, and to the extent that you feel comfortable, try to participate in training. But if you do, make it clear that this is something that you're doing because they're doing a good job of informing you. As for putting an end to it, I think we've we've emphasized that education is key here. But tell your friends, tell your neighbors, tell everyone you know. I think this is a nonpartisan issue that affects everyone. And you can also talk to your legislator. You know RAINN has put together a tremendous memo that can be used for talking points, or you can point them to RAINN and say, this is a concern I have. Can you go talk to RAINN, or can you look at the materials that RAINN has? But your legislator is also a proactive sort of step that you can take, as well as just supporting RAINN, which is the leader in this space, and other associations like RAINN.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: And Sandy, can you provide our listeners on information on how they can get involved and how they can support RAINN.
Sandi Johnson: Yeah, I mean, I would just echo everything that Angelina just said in terms of how to get involved, you know, get involved as a patient. The more that you can ask questions, the more that you can encourage those medical providers to really work with you on informed consent is a great step just on that level. You know one of the things that medical students when they've been surveyed they've been told that, or they respond and say that they either didn't know whether or not the patient gave consent, or they know that the patient didn't. So there's a lot of ambiguity there, and I think the more that you get involved with your, with your medical team and ask them those questions and ask them specifically what they're going to be doing, then it raises that awareness. And I think that also arms those students that later on, if the doctor asks them to do something that they can say “no, we talked about this with the patient, and they said no.” Giving them those tools. But in terms of outside of the surgical room, first of all again, it's just education. So we want you to join us in whichever way you can. If that means you just go home and you talk to your friends and family about what you learned today, most oftentimes, when I'm telling people, their first reaction is, “I can't believe that's happening. Oh, my gosh! That's terrible!” Just educating your friends and family. Making them aware so that they realize that this is an issue and then they go tell people. If your next step is, if you're able to do a little bit more, work with us to help pass the laws. If you are one of those States that has legislation already. Go look at that legislation and see if it's good enough. You know you want to look at again, we've got a great memo, and I'll add the link in the show notes for that memo. You can go compare your law and see if it's good enough, and if it's not, let's improve it. Reach out to us. If it's in an active state, we can come actively lobby with you. You can come, testify at committee hearings with us. You know oftentimes, in my experience, legislation can get passed by a single person, and it's not as scary as most people think. You go up, and you just usually you'll read your statement, and especially in this area, the legislators generally don't have a lot of questions for you, because it is a pretty clear cut issue of it's about informed consent. And as Angelina noted, this is not a partisan issue, this is about every single person being able to consent to what is happening with their body. So come, join us in testifying if it's in a state where we can't lobby, and you want to contact your legislator, again, you're welcome to use our memo and send that to your state legislator. We can provide you with talking points. We can provide you with the materials to send to your legislators. We can provide you with the one pagers. So you can participate in as much as possible, and if you don't have the time to do that, we are a nonprofit organization and right now we have 5 people. We would love to increase our capacity to work on this issue and other issues related to sexual violence. So donate! again, I'll put a link in the show notes of specifically about giving and donating regarding pelvic exams, so that we can increase not only our capacity, but where we can lobby in terms of registration to be a lobbyist, because our ultimate goal is to protect every patient that goes into these for medical procedures, and give them that informed consent over their own bodies and what's happening with their bodies.
Maria F. Di Lorenzo: There are so many different ways that we can all contribute to improving conditions and taking steps to put an end to this practice, and you know whether that's donating to RAINN, advocating or educating, I have to say, Angelina, you really demonstrated that education piece at, it was actually a NAWL meeting where I met you, and you made me aware of this issue, and provided so much content and as we got speaking further, that evolved into this very podcast so I thank you for raising my awareness and now the awareness of a larger audience. And I would just, I would say, Angelina and Sandy, it has been an honor to host this NAWL podcast and I thank you for sharing your knowledge in further raising awareness on this very important issue. Thank you so much for your time.
Sandi Johnson: Yeah, thank you so much. Thank you for this opportunity to help talk to the audience and we really look forward to working with everybody.
Angelina Whitfield: Agreed. Thank you so much for hosting and to Sandy for providing this information. Wonderful to collaborate with you both and here's to the future.
Jess Atkinson: Thank you to Maria, Angelina, and Sandi for sharing their valuable insights on this important topic. Be sure to check out the show notes for additional resources, including an interactive map outlining current legislation by state and ways you can support RAINN’s mission. Thanks for tuning in, and big thanks to NAWL’s sustaining sponsors for making this podcast ad-free. NAWL is hosting its 2025 Annual Meeting in Chicago from July 23rd to 24th. Make sure to register by June 22nd for early bird pricing. Want to get more involved with NAWL? NAWL's Research Committee is seeking new members. Be sure to check out the show notes for this episode to learn more about the committee and how to apply. Thanks for listening!