Why the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act Can Bridge the US Partisan Gap

On April 1, 2025, the Days for Girls (DfG) Advocacy department met with 11 United States Congressional offices alongside the National Coalition to End Period Poverty. The coalition prepared talking points on four federal bills related to menstrual health: the Menstrual Equity for All Act, the Period PROUD Act, the STAMP Act, and the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act. Each of these bills addresses menstrual health in the United States in different ways, including the creation of a menstrual health service block grant, the abolition of the value-added tax on menstrual products, and the provision of menstrual products in all public buildings.

Of the four mentioned bills, the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act is positioned to enable nonprofit and private sector partnerships in combating period poverty while respecting the current budgetary constraints within the United States federal government.

The Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act can appeal to individuals across the political spectrum because:

• It carries no fiscal note nor impacts the revenue-collecting abilities of government entities
• It allows nonprofits and the private sector to use resources more efficiently 
• It recognizes the need for collaboration to solve the public health crisis of period poverty

The Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act makes it easier for nonprofits to reach people who need menstrual care with their preferred product and with donations from private sector partners, especially in times of crisis when governments may need support from non-governmental organizations to meet the increased need.

What is the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act?

The Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act, introduced in the 118th Congress, is designed to encourage the donation of menstrual products by reducing liability for the organizations or individuals who donate menstrual products, as well as the nonprofits who distribute them to the community. This liability may arise from the nature, age, packaging, or condition of apparently usable menstrual products.

The bill proposes:

• Individuals, manufacturers, and distributors are protected from civil or criminal liability if they have donated menstrual products to a nonprofit organization in good faith.
• Nonprofit organizations are protected from civil or criminal liability if they distribute donated menstrual products to the community in good faith.
• If the individual, manufacturer, distributor, or nonprofit organization engages in gross negligence or intentional misconduct resulting in harm to the recipient of the product, liability protection does not apply.

What does the current lack of liability protection mean?

Right now, private sector and nonprofit organizations face undue liability as a result of donating and distributing menstrual products. Unlike food product donations, which are protected under the 1996 Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act, the distribution of an apparently usable menstrual product in good faith is not protected from civil or criminal lawsuits. 

In practice, an example of distribution liability:

A grocery store donates a box of peanut butter to the local food pantry. There are no known quality defects with the product. The food pantry distributes the peanut butter to the community. It is then discovered that the peanut butter’s expiration date had been misprinted, and the peanut butter has expired. Both the grocery store and the food pantry are protected from civil or criminal lawsuits because of the existing Good Samaritan Food Donation Act.

Alternatively, a pharmacy donates a box of tampons to the local hygiene pantry in good faith. Again, the expiration date on the tampons was misprinted, and the tampons are actually expired. When the hygiene pantry distributes the tampons to the community, there are no liability protections. Because insertable period products are considered Class II medical devices in the United States, both the pharmacy and the hygiene pantry may be held civilly or criminally liable if someone incurs injury after using the expired tampons, even though both were acting in good faith with the belief that the tampons were usable.

How does liability protection impact nonprofits?

The added liability associated with insertable period products creates a barrier for nonprofits to receive donations. Even though tampons are the most popular period product in the United States, especially among young adults, private sector manufacturers and nonprofits donate tampons at a much lower rate, and may even elect to destroy potentially usable products in lieu of accepting the risks associated with donating. “Since 2021, Aunt Flow has donated over 7m organic cotton period products to people in need. While we choose to donate tampons, many nonprofits do not feel comfortable accepting the product with the current liability structure,” says Claire Coder, CEO of menstrual product company Aunt Flow. “The Good Samaritan Act would allow nonprofits to receive impactful donations from companies like ours without liability concerns.” 

Only five states currently have liability protection for menstrual products, limiting the locales in which nonprofits can distribute insertable products donated by the private sector without fear of liability concerns. This fear is an unnecessary hindrance to the ability of nonprofits to donate products where they are needed while providing the dignity of product choice to clients.

Why have the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act now?

The current political landscape of the United States is complex, fiscally conservative, and requires quick reactions to the partisan shifts around gender equality and healthcare access. But menstrual health has never been a partisan issue.

Menstrual health has remained a uniting element of gender equality discourse. Most federal menstrual health bills, including the recently reintroduced Period PROUD Act and the oft-cited Menstrual Equity for All Act, have been introduced by members of the Democratic Party. However, there have been only two federal bills passed which sought to directly improve menstrual product access: the First Step Act, which required federal prisons to provide menstrual products to incarcerated individuals, and the CARES Act, which expanded the use of  Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) to include menstrual products. Both bills were introduced by Republican senators and signed by Republican President Donald Trump during his first term. Bills to abolish the value-added tax on menstrual products have been successfully passed in both Democrat- and Republican-controlled state legislatures. At a time when gender politics are heightened, menstrual health and the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act may be uniquely positioned to bridge the partisan divide to make progress in the work to end period poverty in the United States. 

What is next for the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products Act?

Representative Grace Meng (D-NY-6) introduced the Good Samaritan Menstrual Products in the 118th Congress. A Republican co-sponsor in the 119th Congress would lend immense credibility to the nonpartisan nature of the bill and of menstrual health in general. Advocates are currently educating legislators across the political spectrum about this bill, and the support of a Republican co-sponsor ahead of the bill’s reintroduction could pave the way for progress in how the United States government speaks about menstruation. Together – and only together – we can work toward a #PeriodFriendlyUSA where nonprofits, the private sector, and governments are able to collaborate in the work of ending period poverty.