The rock band Florence + the Machine announced it is partnering up with Planned Parenthood to offer reproductive health advice during tour stops.

“Planned Parenthood health centers are a lifeline for millions of people, and they are relentlessly attacked,” lead singer Florence Welch said in a statement on Monday. “Having access to a trusted provider is essential and also the difference between life and death. In this moment of uncertainty for our rights, I’m proud to support Planned Parenthood and create space on my tour for them to connect people with the care and information they need.”

According to Billboard Magazine, Planned Parenthood will have affiliates and tables stationed outside several concerts for the rest of the band’s “Everybody Scream” tour.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD TOUTS VASECTOMIES FOR ‘PEOPLE WHO CARRY SPERM’ AS DEMAND SPIKES AFTER DOBBS

The affiliates will be available to speak with concertgoers on reproductive health care starting with their Minneapolis concert Wednesday night.

“Florence Welch has long used her platform to speak out for reproductive freedom and care, including bravely sharing her personal experience with pregnancy loss,” National Director of Arts and Entertainment for Planned Parenthood Caren Spruch said. “Her new album, ‘Everybody Scream,’ is a powerful testament to the importance of ensuring everyone can make decisions about their own bodies.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Florence + the Machine and Planned Parenthood for comment.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD STARTS OFFERING BOTOX AND FILLERS TO MAKE UP FOR TRUMP FEDERAL FUNDING CUTS

Florence + the Machine kicked off its “Everybody Scream” tour in Europe on Feb. 6. After a one-month break, the tour will resume Wednesday night through August.

Welch previously experienced a miscarriage in 2023 which led to an emergency, life-saving surgery that forced her to cancel two concerts.

FORMER PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINIC DIRECTOR PROMISES TO EXPOSE ABORTION INDUSTRY’S ‘DIRTIEST SECRETS’

She spoke about the miscarriage in an interview with The Guardian in September, revealing that she had an ectopic pregnancy after trying to conceive with her boyfriend.

“The closest I came to making life was the closest I came to death,” Welch said. “And I felt like I had stepped through this door, and it was just full of women, screaming.”

A woman gave birth midair Friday on a flight from Kingston, Jamaica, to New York, turning a routine plane trip into a high-altitude drama.

The mother aboard a Caribbean Airlines flight had a successful delivery, as Fox News Digital previously reported — but shortly after the unexpected arrival, a hot debate about the baby’s citizenship commenced. 

“Sometimes, when a child is not born in a hospital and there’s no birth record, that can create problems,” Cyrus D. Mehta, a New York-based immigration attorney told Fox News Digital. (He is not connected to the Caribbean Airlines case.) 

FLIGHT PASSENGERS SLAM AIRLINES FOR PUSHING EARLY BAG CHECKS EVEN WITH EMPTY BINS ON BOARD

Even so, he added, “it’s very clear. If you’re born in the territory of the United States, even if it’s on an airplane, you are a citizen,” he continued.

“The question is: What constitutes U.S. airspace?” he also said. 

Commenters online debated the issue.

“Is this baby an American?” wrote one person. “Was it born in American airspace? Does that qualify? Seems every other situation possible qualifies under the ‘birthright’ citizenship. What a joke!”

Said another person about the Caribbean Airlines birth, “If the parents are American citizens, then the baby is.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE LIFESTYLE STORIES

Wrote another commenter, “Good example of why the [Supreme Court] needs to rule Trump’s [executive order] as valid. These are not isolated cases — they happen every day of the week. Non-citizens know they’ll win the lottery if they can give birth while in the U.S.”

Caribbean Airlines notes on its website that expectant mothers can travel on their planes without a doctor’s approval until the end of their 32nd week of pregnancy — but travel is not permitted beyond the 35th week. 

Even so, incidents in which women give birth on flights are very uncommon. 

A March 2020 study published by the Journal of Travel Medicine found that between 1929 and 2018, there were 74 in-flight births across 73 commercial flights — with 71 of those newborn infants surviving.

TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ

The primary reason most airlines do not want pregnant women to fly very late in their pregnancies is medical. 

Other procedural issues can occur as well, Mehta said.

Proof of the precise location of the plane during childbirth midair and the moment the baby is born can be challenging.

The government requires a log from an airline or ship “reflecting the latitude and longitude when the birth occurred,” Mehta said. 

“The parent is responsible for reporting the birth to authorities” — and the parents will need a birth certificate if they want to obtain a passport for the child, he added.

Caribbean Airlines said that, while the birth aboard its flight was unexpected, the crew never declared an emergency during the trip. 

Instead, the airline praised its crew, who “managed the situation in accordance with established procedures, ensuring the safety and comfort of all onboard.”

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR LIFESTYLE NEWSLETTER

The airline said the woman and newborn received the care they needed from medical personnel.

The unusual childbirth comes at a time of heated discussion about citizenship laws in the United States.

The Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments on a challenge to President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14160, which limits birthright citizenship in the U.S.

Section one of the 14th Amendment automatically grants citizenship to all persons born in the United States. 

The courts have routinely upheld birthright citizenship for over a century.

Ashley J. DiMella and Lorraine Taylor, both of Fox News Digital, contributed reporting.

MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell said on “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell” that War Secretary Pete Hegseth’s use of the phrase “we leave no man behind” was outdated, as he responded to remarks during a White House briefing about a recent U.S. military rescue operation.

O’Donnell began by addressing Hegseth’s statement directly and contrasting it with what he described as a more modern understanding of military service.

“That is, of course, the old school version of the idea back when only men flew American military planes,” O’Donnell said.

He pointed to how military language has evolved, noting that current leadership has adopted broader terminology.

DEMOCRAT WHOSE PARENTS FLED IRAN MOVES TO OUST HEGSETH

O’Donnell argued that the updated phrasing better reflects the inclusion of women in combat roles, claiming that General Dan Kaine’s framing is more accurate.

“The general knows, unlike Pete Hegseth, that that could have been a woman they were trying to rescue,” O’Donnell said. “It might be a woman the next time.”

HEGSETH DEFENDS TRUMP IRAN STRIKES, DEMANDS MEDIA ‘GET IT RIGHT’

The MSNBC host then broadened his critique, challenging the idea that the U.S. military has consistently upheld the principle in practice.

“This 21st century notion that we leave no one behind ignores the 120,000 prisoners of war held by German and Japanese forces in World War II,” O’Donnell said, noting they were “left behind” for years.

He also referenced the Vietnam War, invoking the experience of the late Sen. John McCain.

TRUMP SAYS IRAN’S SUCCESSION BENCH WIPED OUT AS ISRAELI STRIKE HITS LEADERSHIP DELIBERATIONS

“In Vietnam, we left John McCain behind,” O’Donnell said, recounting how McCain was captured and held as a prisoner of war for five years.

O’Donnell connected that history to comments made by President Donald Trump during his first presidential campaign.

“When reminded that John McCain was a war hero, Donald Trump said he’s not a war hero,” O’Donnell said, quoting Trump’s remark, “‘I like people who weren’t captured.'”

O’Donnell emphasized how modern rescue missions differ significantly from past conflicts.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

“The idea of using 155 aircraft and hundreds of military personnel on an immediate rescue mission for a single person… was inconceivable in World War II or in Vietnam,” he said.

O’Donnell ultimately framed his criticism around what he sees as a disconnect between rhetoric and reality in military history and policy.

“The idea… ignores history,” he said, arguing that the phrase has evolved beyond its original meaning and should reflect both modern service members and historical context.