Reproductive Rights Blog

News Round Up (Sep 19)

Domestic News:

• Did y'all see today's NYT op-ed by Hillary & Cecile?  It's about those horrible draft regulations by HHS that would not only affect abortion, but IVF, end of life care, and, frankly, the ability of a business to hire people that will do the work of the business.
• Yale released its list of women friendly law firms.  Also, being male means you make more as a lawyer (maybe because men have been in the legal profession longer or stay in firms?) 
• The Economist says America's feminists have won. 
• U.S. female soldiers  are "'more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire,' said Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA)"

Election:

• Jezebel reviews Palin's record on women's health.

Foreign News:

• Divorce is becoming more acceptable in India.  interference from the groom's mother is an oft-cited reason for filing for divorce.  When I was in India we saw many cases of bride burnings and dowry deaths, so it's uplifting to think that a troubled marriage can end in divorce, rather than death. 
• Japanese women don't want to be mommy to husband and baby. So they're not getting married.  It reminds me of that whole stupid don't marry career women thing.

Health & Science:

• Giving women in labor antibiotics could be dangerous.
• Half of women surveyed would ask a friend to impregnate them if they didn't have a partner by some point in their lives.
• Gardasil approved for vulvar and vaginal cancers, in addition to cervical.  I have two friends who have had vulvar/vaginal cancer.  One died of it, which is very rare. 

One of these days I'm really just going to give y'all the news I've been saving but not posting because it seems only moderately relevant, and then you'll have reading material for weeks!  But not today - I'm going on vacation. 

News Round Up (Sep 10)

I'm just going to dump a whole lot of links out for you today:

Editorial in NYT about how women need to be more involved in politics.

Cost evaluation of HPV vaccine: "routine vaccination of 12-year-old girls, in addition to routine cervical screening, costs $43,600 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, above the cost of screening alone. For girls aged 13 to 18 years, the cost was $97,300 per QALY. Extending vaccination to women aged 21 cost $120,400 per QALY, and up to 26 years of age, the cost was $152,700 per QALY."

Slate article about how the anti-choicers took over the Republican party.  Sarah Palin is particularly anti-choice, what with being a member of Feminists for Life.  Meanwhile the Dems are moving to what Slate is calling "pro-choices" meaning that there's support for whatever decision a woman makes - from raising a baby, to giving it up for adoption to abortion.

Planned Parenthood releases "sexy" sex ed videos, reports ABC.

Pakistan investigates honor killings of women.  What's news is not the honor killings, which are widespread and happen in America, but the investigation.

Preconception care, again.  I got in a big argument with some folks yesterday about women being more than their wombs.  I hate preconception care - it's so condescending. 

A drug company is filing for approval of a drug to prevent preterm births.

The Mexican Supreme Court upheld the abortion law.  "To affirm that there is an absolute constitutional protection of life in gestation would lead to the violation of the fundamental rights of women," said Justice Sergio Valls.

Forbes released its list of the 100 most powerful women.

From the Convention - Women's Events

I'm here in Denver, blogging from a hotel on 16th street at least in part as a respite from the heat.  I only had a few events out here, and by and large they're over with, so I'm heading back to DC tomorrow.  Since I'm on this hotel computer, I can't open new windows, which means I can't link or do research, so I'll come back and edit later this week.

Monday I started off at the Unconventional Women event, put on by a coalition of groups focused on getting women to vote, run for office, and get elected.  It was the first of two times I heard Shelia Johnson of BET and the Mystics speak.  Debbie Stabenow talked about fair pay and research on women's health.  Page Gardner, from Women's Voices, Women Vote, also spoke about the marriage gap.  She said that single women are 26% of the vote, and that married women vote differently than unmarried women.  For example, Kerry had a 25 point lead among unmarried women, while Bush had an 11 point lead among married women.  Right now, Obama has a 29 point lead among unmarried women, and McCain has a 4 point lead among married women.

I have been incredibly lucky to meet so many amazing women activists, including the ladies from WIN and NFPRHA.  Today I saw with some WINners at the Women's Caucus.  Andrea Wong, from Lifetime, pointed out that today is Women's Equality Day - it's the 88th anniversary of suffrage.  Then Rosario Dawson and Eva Longoria spoke about their work in trying to get Latinas registered to vote.  And oh my goodness was Donna Brazille unbelievable?!  She talked about our right to choose, affirmative action, hate crimes legislation, and said that all doors are open for everyone, regardless of sex, color, ethnicity or sexual orientation.  It was an amazing speech. 

A lot of women from the DNC spoke, and of course the overarching theme was getting women, especially Clinton supporters, behind Obama.  They did a great job of it.  Ellen Marcom, Shelia Johnson and Cecile Richards spoke as did Senator Stabenow. 

Mrs. Stabenow said that "John McCain is bad for women and families" and talked about the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and Roe. 

Cecile Richards said that "Five men in robes don't know better than women what's best for their health care" and that "women for McCain is like chickens for Col. Sanders." 

I can't do justice to their speeches, especially Donna and Shelia's, which were just amazing.  Shelia Johnson reminded us to focus on issues and stands, not color and sex.  I'm sure y'all are reading plenty about where the candidates stand on the issues that matter, like reproductive rights, fair pay, paid sick leave, health coverage, the war, and any other issues you find compelling.  Keep reading, and vote.  When I get back we'll do a normal news round up.

News Round Up (Aug 22)

I'm off to the DNC Convention this weekend, so I won't be blogging from here, but hopefully I'll have good stuff to report back.  I'm going to do an event on women's cancers, but while I'm there I'll have time to head to some women's events, and hopefully volunteer with the Women's Campign Forum.

While you're at work (or home over the weekend) here's what you should know:

Slate reports on the TNR piece you already read about McCain's anti-choice voting record.  Here's what I don't understand: The religious right says a pro-choice running mate would alienate them from McCain, but where are they going?  Similarly, where is the left going if Obama isn't pro-choice enough?  Who else are you going to vote for?  Also, why is abortion still this huge voting issue?  What about the economy, the environment, housing...?

So, fewer women are having children in the United States.  Unsurprisingly, those with higher levels of education and/or income had fewer children than those with less education or income. 

Other news: interesting HIV privacy case, more hoopla about the HPV vaccine, Working Mother came out with the 2008 best firms to work for list,

Animal news: Waco has an animal birth control clinic.

Abortion and Mental Health

Over the years there has been much back and forth about how abortion affects a woman's mental health.  From the feminism of the 1960s to the current "safe, legal and rare", we rarely hear about abortion without it being tied to a woman's state of mind.  Back in the 1960s, women needed the right to abortion to get rid of their traditional role as mother and caretaker; today we hear countless politicians talk about how hard it is to make the decision to have an abortion.

Recently, mandatory counseling laws have been enacted to expand informed consent to, often, uninformed consent - telling women that abortion causes breast cancer or that she is killing a separate human being.  Some of these mandatory counseling laws include provisions about how depressed a woman will be after an abortion (not how depressed she may be...she may also feel elated).

Today, we have a report from the American Psychological Association which says that abortion does not, in fact, cause depression.  Here's a large excerpt from the Press Release:

"The best scientific evidence published indicates that among adult women who have an unplanned pregnancy, the relative risk of mental health problems is no greater if they have a single elective first-trimester abortion or deliver that pregnancy," said Brenda Major, PhD, chair of the task force. "The evidence regarding the relative mental health risks associated with multiple abortions is more uncertain."

The task force found that some studies indicate that some women do experience sadness, grief and feelings of loss following an abortion, and some may experience "clinically significant disorders, including depression and anxiety." However, the task force found "no evidence sufficient to support the claim that an observed association between abortion history and mental health was caused by the abortion per se, as opposed to other factors."

The report noted that other co-occurring risk factors, including poverty, prior exposure to violence, a history of emotional problems, a history of drug or alcohol use, and prior unwanted births predispose women to experience both unwanted pregnancies and mental health problems after a pregnancy, irrespective of how the pregnancy is resolved. Failures to control for these co-occurring risk factors, the task force noted, may lead to reports of associations between abortion history and mental health problems that are misleading.

The report noted that women have abortions for many different reasons and within different personal, social, economic and cultural circumstances, all of which could affect a woman's mental state following abortion. "Consequently," the task force wrote, "global statements about the psychological impact of abortion can be misleading."

According to the report, women terminating a wanted pregnancy, who perceived pressure from others to terminate their pregnancy, or who perceived a need to keep their abortion secret from their family and friends because of stigma associated with abortion, were more likely to experience negative psychological reactions following abortion.

Of course there are lots of women who regret having an abortion, some who become dedicated anti-choice crusaders, like Leslee Unruh.  But that doesn't mean that abortion is the wrong choice for everyone and will permanently scare the psyche of every woman (or that only people who have had multiple abortions can support a woman candidate).  In fact, if a woman freely chooses abortion and isn't judged for it, it sounds like she'll be much better off.  So yes, the pro-choice movement should be involved in post-abortion counseling, but for my money, I'd prefer pre-abortion counseling.  This counseling could not only make sure that a woman understands the medical procedure she's about to have, but make sure that she's not being coerced, that she has a support system, that if she has drug, alcohol or violence problems in her life that she is referred for help.  These are the efforts we can make if we're interested in improving mental health for women having abortions.

[Edited because I just saw Linda Hirschman's column in Slate about the Democratic Platform, this issue, and the whole "abortion is hard" b.s. and you should too.]

Election Stuff - Ramping Up

I'm gearing up for the elections in a lot of small and big ways, including continuing to work with the Women's Campaign Forum (if you are coming to the Hail to the Chiefs Event, please let me know!) and maybe going to the Democratic Convention (if I can find housing). 

The campaigns are also heating up, and we're going to be hearing a lot more about abortion and birth control over the next few weeks, in addition to housing prices, gas prices, taxes and health care.

The Dems released their platform this weekend, which is firmly pro-choice. 

Choice

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to affordable family planning services and comprehensive age-appropriate sex education which empowers people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman's decision to have a child by ensuring access to and availability of programs for pre- and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.

There is a very interesting article in the New Republic about the inclusion of a choice statement in the Democratic party's platform this year. 

The anti-choice Democrats want to focus more on reducing the need for abortion, which, really, I just cannot fathom how anyone could possibly talk more about reducing the need for abortions in our mealy mouthed milquetoast compromise of a political platform we think we have.  If reducing the need for abortion is in the middle, with no abortions being on the right and the far left being abortion discount coupons given out at halloween, just how much further right do we move before we're not even worried about access to abortion anymore?  How much past the middle are we going to "compromise"? 

Okay, rant over.  Maybe.

The amazing leadership of the Democrats who have been the protectors of choice during their six years in Congress keeps us safe and helps me sleep at night.

So anyway, the Presidential election, on whom four Supreme Court appointments hang, is between Barack Obama, who is said to be clearly pro-choice, but, maybe not, like, 100%, versus John McCain, who is definitely clearly  anti-choice.  According to the latter article, McCain has voted anti choice in 125 of 130 votes on the issue, supports the Global Gag Rule, and consistently gets 0% voting records from folks like NARAL.  Plus, he has voted against requiring coverage of birth control, and all sorts of other things, then says "I don't know that much about it" when called on the carpet for his votes.

Which, means, like most voters with particular issues, there's no one candidate who's a good match for my opinions.  I am left with no strong feeling that Congress, regardless of it's official pro-choice stance, is going to do much good for protecting my ability to make decisions about the private personal things that go on inside my body, regardless of any rhetoric to the contrary.

News Round Up (Aug. 8)

I've been out of the office, and out of the country, for the majority of the past few weeks, and only managed to blog once in that time.  So here's a bunch of stuff you should know about, if you don't.

Also, I think I'm going to the DNC Convention in Denver.  Any tips?  Invites?  Hotel rooms for me?  I have a three hour event I need to attend on Monday, but am open to being there as long as I can be.

Okay, news:

Of course, you know that the laws around surrogacy are complex and nowhere near settled, but adding an international issue to the mix makes things even more complex!  A Japanese couple used an Indian surrogate to have a baby, but the Japanese couple divorced before the baby was born - the ex-husband wants to adopt the baby, and apparently neither the ex-wife nor the surrogate mom wants the baby.  He, apparently, has no rights to the child.

People 16 and over in the UK will soon have access to a chlamydia drug over the counter.

Now, y'all know how I feel about diamonds, generally, and engagement rings in particular, no?  If not, I'll direct you this article, which nicely sums up many points I make.  Plus, also, there's this whole anti-trust thing with DeBeers that is just horrid, not to mention the brilliant but evil marketing as well as supply chain issues.  Anyway, DeBeers is trying to "polish its image" which has been the headline of more than one article this decade.  Keep trying, folks.

How much do we want to talk about whether or not abortion is murder?  I know lots of folks do.  One: the South Dakota law that requires "informed consent" to include a statement that a fetus is a separate life was upheld this summer.  Two: The leak of the HHS secret regulation that defines abortion as anything interfering with the process from conception to live birth, which includes IUDs, the Morning After Pill and many other hormonal contraceptives.  Secretary Leavitt says that the draft ruling isn't ready for release, but he doesn't seem to address the issue of definition abortion.

Animal story: Ancient lizard couple lays fertilized eggs.  The male is 111 years old, the female almost 80.

News Round Up (July 18)

I've been in and out of the office and working crazy hours the past two weeks, and I'm leaving for a no-internet vacation shortly.  In the meantime, in case you didn't know, here's what you should have been reading:

McCain is no more pro-choice than he used to be, including that he doesn't know anything about insurance not covering birth control.

But how pro-choice is Obama?  The antis say "very".

Catholic Charities signed off on a young woman having an abortion, contrary to Catholic values which don't include, um, sympathy.

Child bride in the middle east advocates for her own divorce.

Obese moms tend to have obese children.

I don't care if it's not politically correct, I still love Linda Hirschman and all her judgeyness.  Some folks say that women's empowerment has caused a backlash, and isn't staying at home better than working, and I don't really know, because I don't have kids and staying at home is kind of boring for me, plus, I have one of those jobs where I get paid to, do things like talk, and my hours aren't horrible, and I'm really not doing manual labor or doing the shit work no one else wants to do.  So yeah, I get that for most women, probably, staying at home seems better than working, it also seems a damned shame that women with the ability to do whatever they want in life (like this whole overblown opt-out thing) to make this planet better and make themselves real self-actualized full grown human beings choose to stay home and build tree forts daily.

Microbicides more useful for men than women.

A woman who maybe cut her own fetus's umbilical cord in utero is being charged with manslaughter.  But the facts still aren't clear.

EU developing more codes on embryo screening.

We've known for years that one of the fastest growing segments of the United States population getting HIV was senior citizens.  Now we hear that it's the middle aged folks getting STIs.  Kids, talk to your parents!

Actually, this week I was training some folks at the Choice USA leadership conference, and I'm so old, I said, that I had comprehensive sex education classes!  So maybe kids shouldn't be talking to their parents, if the kids are getting misinformed through ab only programs.

New fertility technique helps gather eggs from women with cancer.  Speaking of fertility, we already knew that men over 40 had fertility issues - higher rates of certain diseases like autism and schizophrenia were also seen in their offspring.  A new study shows that it is also more difficult for men over 40 to impregnate a woman.

The man who promulgated the Global Gag Rule, Jesse Helms, died.

Looks like the HPV vaccine is still safe, but still only for the kids.

There's more, of course, but I'm heading out; I'll be gone for more than a week, but send me articles on stuff I should know about!

Military Insurance (TRICARE) proposes to cover post-assault exams

TRICARE, the insurance for the uniformed services, has released a proposed rule today that would change coverage for the insurance system.  The proposed rule includes covering exams for sexual assault or domestic violence.  While the costs of these are often shared by the private co-insurance, some victims of assault were getting billed for the exams.  The coverage sheet reads:

However, there is a dual purpose of the examination process. One purpose is to address the needs of the individual disclosing sexual assault, which include evaluating and treating injuries; conducting prompt examinations; providing support, crisis intervention, and advocacy; providing prophylaxis against sexually transmitted diseases; assessing female patients for pregnancy risk and discussing treatment options, including reproductive health services; and providing follow-up care for medical and emotional needs. The other purpose is to address justice system needs. The needs for justice system are: obtaining a history of the assault, documenting exam findings, properly collecting, handling, and preserving evidence, and interpreting and analyzing findings (post exam) and subsequently, presenting findings and providing factual and expert opinion related to the exam and evidence collection.

I like that the proposed rule addresses both a psychological intervention, and a pursuit of justice.

At the link to the proposed rule are instructions for how to weigh in - please feel free.

AT&T Discriminates Against Women (Still)

In the late 1960s/early 1970s, Noreen Hulteen, Eleanora Collet, Linda Porter and Elizabeth Snyder took maternity leave from their jobs at AT&T.  Under AT&T rules during this time, pregnancy was considered personal leave, and counted against employees for promotions, vacation, and pensions.  Other types of long term sick leave, taken by men or women, were not counted against the employees.  This type of discrimination, against only pregnant people, is currently illegal under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. Today, AT&T is counting the pregnancy leave against these women for purposes of their pensions.  In 2008!  Regardless of the fact that the treatment is illegal today, AT&T continues to fight this case, and has pushed for the Supreme Court to review its previous court losses.

AT&T is pursing a Supreme Court case to continue discriminating against pregnant women.  

AT&T doesn’t have to continue pushing for review of this case – it has every right to drop the case, and, ethically, shouldn’t it?  AT&T purports to be women’s friendly (http://www.att.com/gen/corporate-citizenship?pid=7752), but this clearly isn’t.

Here’s what you need to do: e-mail Nicole Pickens at [email protected] and Sue McCain at [email protected]. Also, Apple has given AT&T exclusive cell phone rights to the i-Phone.  Call Apple at 408.974.2042 or e-mail Susan Lundgren in Apple's PR department at [email protected].

Write that you want AT&T to withdraw its Supreme Court Petition, or you’ll withdraw service.  Ask why AT&T continues to discriminate against women, and why Apple supports this kind of corporate practice. If AT&T withdraws its petition to the Supreme Court, the lower court's ruling for women will stand.  Women must send a message to AT&T, a wealthy company, that discrimination against women is not an acceptable corporate practice.  Either AT&T withdraws its petition from the Supreme Court, or we'll withdraw our business from AT&T.

You can also call AT&T Customer Service to ask if AT&T has withdrawn its position. If the customer service representative doesn't know what you're talking about, say that AT&T discriminates against women, and you want to cancel your contract.  If they won't let you out of it, let me know ([email protected]) and we will handle it.  I am working with a large coalition on this.  You are welcome to join us!

If you are a blogger or part of the media, call 210-821-4105, press 3, for other, and ask for corporate media or you can e-mail folks directly.  Interestingly, there are no press releases about this case...funny, that.

[Ed. note: Washington Post covered the story here]

[Ed. again because I am going to keep updating what other blogs are saying about this: Lawyers Guns and Money, Feminist Law Professors, Women'sTake (NWLC)]