by Ellen Bravo

My favorite Mother’s day gifts from my sons were their original stories, songs and poems. But what I needed when they were infants and toddlers was something children can’t deliver: affordable time off when they were born and when they were sick.

So for all those candidates and elected officials interested in the women’s vote and eager to prove their support for motherhood and families, here’s a sampling of what mothers want and need, not just one day a year but every day:

The right to care for a sick child or personal illness without losing our paychecks or our jobs. Moms need leaders to actively support the right for workers to earn paid sick days and champion local, state and federal policies that would guarantee this protection. Make sure no one has to choose between being a good parent and being a good employee — and that no one has to serve you flu with your soup.

The right to coverage under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Half of private sector workforce employees aren’t covered by this law because they work for an employer with fewer than 50 workers, haven’t been on the job for at least 12 months or work less than 25 hours a week. Moms need Members of Congress to work to expand FMLA to cover all employees after 90 days of employment.

The ability to afford leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Many who are covered under FMLA can’t afford to take the time without pay. As a result, nearly 3 million eligible workers a year who need leave to care for their health or the health of a loved one don’t take it, according to a 2000 Labor Department survey. And nearly 9 percent of those who do (including 20 percent for low-income families) are forced to rely on public assistance to keep food on the table, according to a 1995 Department of Labor report. Moms need leaders to voice their support for policies to create family leave insurance funds like those that are working in California and New Jersey so that caring for a new or seriously ill child doesn’t trigger financial catastrophe.

The right to care for one’s partner regardless of their gender. Being able to marry who you love — and being able to care for one another in sickness as well as in health — shouldn’t be a gift, it should be a right. Moms are glad to see more of our leaders standing up for the rights of all families by supporting marriage equality legislation and bills to expand FMLA access to same-sex partners.

The right to attend children’s school activities. Far too many children in this country never see their mom at a school play or sporting event because employers won’t let them take off work or rearrange their schedules. Mothers need leaders to support the right to use family leave to do what’s best for raising our children.

A recognition that men are parents, have parents and also need time to care. All the policies listed above are gender-neutral. Moms — and dads — need leaders to end on-the-job punishment of men who want to be good fathers, sons and husbands. That will also boost women’s efforts to get men to share the work at home.

This list flows from deeply held American values: that no one should have to risk a job to be a good family member or put a loved one at risk in order to keep a job. Mothers want basic standards that guarantee these rights to everyone.

And candidates, if you don’t believe me, check the polls. More and more voters — from all political perspectives — say they’re more likely to support candidates who’ll make sure family values don’t end at the workplace door, and who understand that for the economy to recover, we need policies like these to help people stay employed and have money to spend at local businesses.

Doing the politically smart thing for moms is also doing the right thing for families and for our nation.

Ellen Bravo directs Family Values @ Work, a network of state coalitions organizing to win paid sick days and paid family leave. The former director of 9to5, National Association of Working Women, Ellen also teaches Women’s Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Her most recent book is “Taking on the Big Boys, or Why Feminism is Good for Families, Business and the Nation” (Feminist Press, 2007).

By Eliza Duggan, OBOS Intern

After listening to environmental experts discuss the effects of toxins, it’s easy to become wary of eating non-organic food, drinking town water, or even breathing the air. But workshop organizers at the Toxics Action Center‘s 25th Annual Environmental Action Conference exuded an enthusiasm for steps we can take that left me more aware and hopeful than stressed.

The March 3 event at Northeastern University’s student center was bustling with environmental supporters. Most of the attendees were already involved in local organizing efforts throughout New England, but there was also an encouraging number of people of all ages who came to learn more about improving their community’s health.

Cynthia Jennings of the Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice welcomed attendees with a punchy speech that encouraged everyone to remember that, “All of these organizations started with one person working for the environment.”

The conference was organized into alternating workshops and speakers on topics ranging from zero-waste initiatives to lobbying decision makers. I attended two workshops that addressed local environmental toxins, the first of which had an ambitious title: “Toxics In Our Towns: Passing Effective Local Policy to Reduce and Eliminate Pesticides.” The panel included Chip Osborne of Osborne Organics, whose passion for organic horticulture drives him to educate citizens and municipalities on chemical-free lawn and turf care, and members of Green Cape, an organization that develops non-toxic strategies in Cape Cod.

There are many reasons to support chemical-free horticulture, but among the most compelling arguments I found were the prenatal and postnatal effects of pesticide and herbicide exposure on fetal development and a child’s long-term health. One study that measured the effect of IQ in relation to pesticide exposure found that children who had heavy pesticide contact had poorer scores than those who had less.

The second workshop was called “Toxic Chemicals A to Z: Protecting Your Body, Your Community and Beyond.” Although many common household and personal care items — including plastic food containers, household cleaners, and cosmetics — contain synthetic chemicals and potential carcinogens that can endanger our general and reproductive health, the panel focused more on solutions than on problems.

Individually, we can try to purchase safer products (the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics is a good site for learning more about what’s in the products you use), but large-scale structural changes are also necessary. Efforts in Massachusetts include the Safer Alternatives bill, which would create a program to develop alternatives to hazardous chemicals.

Two activists answered questions about engaging in environmental projects. Jan Schlictmann, an attorney who has fought for victims of water contamination, discussed the passion that drives him and others working in this field. A dynamic speaker, Schlictmann emphasized the importance of sharing experiences, acquiring facts (the best response weapon), and empowering ourselves and others.

Lois Gibbs, executive director of the Center for Health, Environment and Justice, spoke next. Her environmental activism was sparked in the late 1970s after discovering her son’s elementary school in Niagara Falls, N.Y., was built on top of a toxic chemical dump. She encouraged conference attendees to be “creative, out-of-the-box thinkers” — a critical skill in environmental justice efforts.

The conference was not only a call to continue to actively participate in environmental efforts, but also a celebration of the good works that have been done, with much hope for the future. You can view Toxics Action Center’s timeline of environmental victories and communities in action at toxicsaction25.org.

Plus: Need more inspiration to get involved? Read an excerpt from the 2011 edition of “Our Bodies, Ourselves” about women who have exposed environmental health hazards and worked to eliminate them.

Eliza Duggan, a Maine native, is a junior at Boston College with a passion for women’s issues. She has been an intern with Our Bodies Ourselves since May of 2011.

We are delighted and honored that Good Vibrations selected Our Bodies Ourselves as one of  four nonprofit organizations it’s promoting during the months of February and March. That means shoppers can select OBOS during checkout online and in stores and make a donation that goes entirely to the organization.

We’re in excellent company! From the Good Vibrations press release:

Good Vibrations, the trusted San Francisco-based company that takes pride in providing accurate information on sexuality and toys for grown-ups, is delighted to announce a new partnership with four regional non-profits as part of their corporate giving initiative, GiVe. Beneficiary organizations are La Casa de las Madres of San Francisco, AIDS Project of the East Bay in Berkeley, ACCESS Women’s Health Justice in Oakland, and Our Bodies Ourselves in Boston.

From February 1st to March 31st, Good Vibrations’ customers can support these regional nonprofits in Good Vibrations retail locations: San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, Boston and online. Shoppers can make a financial gift at the time of their Good Vibrations purchase and 100% of your contribution goes to the nonprofit of your choice. [...]

Staff Sexologist Dr. Carol Queen says, “With people celebrating romance and connectedness during Valentine’s Day, we invite them to experience the pleasure of generosity to these worthwhile organizations that support people through some of the more difficult aspects of relationships and sexuality. We are honored to be able to bring the GiVe program to this remarkable group of non-profits.

And if you’re in the Boston area, you can join Dr. Queen and OBOS’s Judy Norsigian this Sunday, Feb. 12, at a special pre-Valentine’s Day Mixer and Info Tour at Good Vibrations in Brookline!

It’s a free event, and you’ll enjoy a light reception and store tour led by Dr. Queen. This is a great opportunity to learn everything you ever wanted to know but were afraid to ask.

Pease RSVP (office AT bwhbc.org or call 617-245-0200) so we can provide Good Vibrations with an accurate number for refreshments. Here are the details:

Sunday, Feb. 12, 3 – 5 p.m.
Good Vibrations Brookline Store
308A Harvard Street Brookline, MA

Hope to see you there! If you can’t make it, stop in at a Good Vibrations store or shop online through March 31!

Escrito por Rachel. Traducido del orginial en inglés Jan 20, 2012.

OBOS has received funding to make blog entries available in Spanish. We hope to expand outreach efforts in the coming year.

La secretaria del Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos (HHS), Kathleen Sebelius, publicó la declaración que establece el reglamento que requiere que los planes de seguro cubran el uso de anticonceptivos, sin la necesidad de un copago, un coaseguro, o un deducible.

Este servicio no siempre estuvo garantizado.  El pasado agosto, el HHS adoptó las recomendaciones del Instituto de Medicina para incluir los servicios de planificación familiar como uno de los aspectos del cuidado preventivo de la salud para las mujeres, a ser cubierto por los nuevos planes de salud, pero solo fue un reglamento provisional, sujeto a interpretaciones.

En noviembre hubo mucha preocupación sobre si la decisión de que los  anticonceptivos sean cubiertos como servicio preventivo por la Ley del Cuidado de Salud a Bajo Precio iba a sobrevivir. El Presidente Obama se reunió con obispos Católico Romanos, y uno de ellos salió de la reunión diciendo, “Salí sintiéndome un poco más en paz sobre el tema que cuando entré.”

Como se puede entender, muchas personas expresaron la preocupación de que la administración iba a abandonar los requisitos de cobertura para el control de la natalidad y a su vez ampliar el reglamento que permita el rechazo, para permitir que hospitales y universidades católicas nieguen cobertura de servicios de planificación familiar.  Pero la administración rechazó los pedidos que permitían a los empleadores optar por no cubrir anticonceptivos.  La declaración de Sebelius dice en parte:

Después de evaluar los comentarios, hemos decido añadir un elemento más al reglamento final. Los empleadores sin fines de lucro que basados en creencias religiosas no proveen cobertura para anticonceptivos en sus planes de seguro tendrán un año adicional, hasta el 1ro de agosto del 2013, para cumplir con la nueva ley.  Los empleadores que quieran aprovechar del año adicional necesitan probar que califican para la implementación retardada.  Este año adicional permitirá que estas organizaciones tengan más tiempo y flexibilidad para adaptarse a este nuevo reglamento.  Nosotros esperamos requerir que los empleadores que no ofrecen cobertura de servicio de anticonceptivos provean notificación a sus empleados, informándoles que los servicios de anticonceptivos están disponibles en lugares como centros comunitarios de salud, clínicas públicas y hospitales con ayuda basada en los ingresos.  Vamos a seguir trabajando estrechamente con grupos religiosos durante este periodo de transición para discutir sus preocupaciones.

Los científicos tienen mucha evidencia sobre los beneficios del control de la natalidad para la salud de mujeres y de sus familias.  Se ha documentado que reduce los costos de salud considerablemente, y es el medicamento tomado con más frecuencia en los Estados Unidos por jóvenes y mujeres de edad mediana. Este reglamento proveerá a las mujeres mayor acceso a los anticonceptivos por cuanto requiere la cobertura y prohíbe los costos compartidos.

Información adiciónale sobre el tema:

• Obama anuncia acuerdo con grupos religiosos sobre anticonceptivos – de CNN
• Condón y píldora enfrentan a Obama con obispos católicos – de BBC

Solo los hechos:

• las Latinas y la cobertura de los anticonceptivos – del Instituto Latino Nacional para la Salud Reproductiva

This article was originally published in On The Issues Magazine as part of its special issue on abortion history, politics and activism, featuring contributions from dozens of writers and artists.

by Ayesha Chatterjee and Judy Norsigian

As current staff members at Our Bodies Ourselves (OBOS), an organization that has advanced the health and human rights of women and girls over four decades, and longtime reproductive justice activists, we continue to hope that safe and affordable abortion care will, someday, become a reality for everyone. With increasing attacks and restrictions on abortion access worldwide, we have our work cut out.

Here, in the U.S., the debate around abortion has become especially polarized. Right-wing and anti-choice groups bombard young people with messages that stereotype and stigmatize those seeking abortion services — both individuals and entire communities.

Think: billboards have popped up around the country equating abortion to the genocide of African-American children, who are further described as an “endangered species.” These — and other — oversimplified messages mock a personal and often complex decision, not to mention the right to a constitutionally protected and medically safe procedure. They influence how people, especially young people, articulate and align themselves on abortion. They drive our activism — our tireless commitment to alliances across aisles and opinions, and to conversations that move beyond “pro-life” and “pro-choice” rhetoric to focus on the individual, her needs, rights and circumstances.

Engaging, mobilizing and building alliances on an issue like abortion can be an uphill climb. But as 2012 rolls in, we want to take a few minutes to remind you about why it is important and suggest a few ways you can go about this challenge.

Building Up Our Friends
Our allies are our greatest strength. We especially need to appeal to the hearts and minds of people “on the fence,” by connecting abortion rights to principles that they hold valuable — equality, privacy, dignity, security and more. We must show how these principles will be affected if we do not have the fundamental right to reproductive freedom.

We believe that we can even engage anti-choice people in conversations about how restrictions on access to abortion affect women and girls — especially those who are uninsured, under-insured, socially or ethnically marginalized and isolated.

Create safe spaces for respectful dialogue
We need to take a few minutes to contact the judges in our communities and ask them to defend the rights of women and girls. Monica Roa, the lawyer who argued a case before Colombia’s Supreme Court that liberalized that nation’s restrictive abortion law in May 2006, identifies judges as a key audience: “Judicial bias is a major conflict throughout the world.” She proposes a highly effective “court targeting” approach that includes getting better acquainted with specific judges and their position on issues.

And we must not forget our friends, our existing allies — an activist neighbor, a local abortion fund or a provider — on the forefront of the abortion rights movement and under threat because of it. Supporting them is critical and we can do so in a number of ways. We can donate money to local abortion funds which provide financial and logistical assistance to women that need abortions, or simply volunteer our time to their activities — a list of abortion funds is online.

We can also volunteer at clinics, in roles that range from administrative to serving as clinic escorts that guide staff, providers and clients in and out of clinics and shield them from harassment and pro-life demonstrators. If these options seem daunting, we can help tremendously by just talking — with family and friends at home, with our community via blogs and local newspapers, and with our political representatives on the phone.

Listening and Engaging Listeners
In our bid to build alliances across the table, those of us involved in the struggle to preserve abortion rights must develop new tools of moral suasion. How? For a start, we need to be good listeners, good storytellers and patient communicators, and to create safe spaces for respectful dialogue, either one-on-one or in groups.

Judy Norsigian:
I remember an eye-opening conversation many years ago with a priest — a family friend — who had regularly sermonized about the evils of abortion. He described how one year a woman came to him afterwards and described WHY she had had her own abortion and why what he had said in church was so wrong and hurtful to her and many other women. A thoughtful and compassionate person, he decided to cease such sermons, but his comment about this encounter was instructive: “Don’t get me wrong, I still think of abortion as killing life in some form…I have not changed my mind about that. But what I realize now is that an abortion can be the RIGHT and moral thing to do.”

In the years that followed, I found a number of people who resonated with this kind of thinking and who could find a way to support a woman’s right to choose, while, at the same time, holding on to the concept of abortion as an act that destroyed life in some form. They noted that society does, at times, sanction even the killing of human beings (during war, in self defense) and, thus, could envision abortion as a moral choice and one to be preserved for women needing to make that choice.

Ayesha Chatterjee:
Active in the grassroots abortion access movement in the Boston area, I am also expecting my first baby in the spring of 2012. While I see absolutely no dichotomy in my activist and parenting roles, I have been asked a few times whether becoming a mother has softened my position on abortion rights, made me more empathetic to pro-life reasoning. My response: Far from it!

My decision to have children is situated within my unique context and personal needs and capacity. If anything, the hands-on experience with the ongoing physical, emotional and financial commitment needed to nurture another human being has only deepened my understanding of an incredibly complex and personal issue, as well as my appreciation of why some decide to terminate their pregnancy and others, despite the many and different challenges, carry theirs to term.

When we are at a loss for words, drawing on other eloquent voices in the reproductive justice movement can help get the discussion started.

For starters, here are a couple such individuals:

Dr. Garson Romalis, a Canadian abortion doctor, whose speech on January 25, 2008 at the University of Toronto Law School Symposium is well worth reading. Dr. Romalis had been physically attacked — shot and stabbed, on two different occasions six years apart — and remained deeply committed to providing abortion services throughout his long career.

At the close of his speech, he wanted to describe “one last story that I think epitomizes the satisfaction I get from my privileged work.” He continued, “Some years ago I spoke to a class of University of British Columbia medical students. As I left the classroom, a student followed me out. She said: ‘Dr. Romalis, you won’t remember me, but you did an abortion on me in 1992. I am a second year medical student now, and if it weren’t for you I wouldn’t be here now.’”

Lynn Paltrow, executive director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women, offers many compelling insights in, for example, “Missed Opportunities in McCorvey v. Hill: The Limits of Pro-Choice Lawyering,” (pdf) in the New York University Review of Law & Social Change in 2011, or “Long-Term Policies, Long-Term Gains,” (pdf) in Conscience in Winter 2006-2007.

In the latter, Paltrow writes: “those who defend the right to choose abortion often frame their defense in terms of protecting Roe v.Wade and access to abortion services. But far more than Roe and abortion is at stake. The health, dignity and human rights of all pregnant women are threatened by anti-abortion and fetal rights laws. Such laws create the basis not only for outlawing abortion but also for forcing women to have unnecessary Caesarean sections, for banning vaginal births after Caesarean sections and for treating pregnant women with drug, alcohol and other health problems as child abusers before they have even given birth.”

It also helps to be prepared for contentious conversations with compelling arguments and facts.

Anti-abortion advocates often use dangerous and misleading approaches to restrict access to abortion and birth control, and having a counter argument ready goes a long way. This misinformation runs the gamut — from claiming that the emergency contraception or morning-after pill (Plan B) is the same as the “abortion pill” to asserting that feticide laws, now existing in about 38 states and on the federal level, protect pregnant women, when in reality they are frequently used against pregnant women, especially those who may have used drugs during a pregnancy.

So, staying abreast of facts to counter their fiction is critical and there are innumerable on-line and off-line resources. Here are two: Guttmacher Institute and Ipas.

Converting Our Energy
When we gain ground by changing hearts, minds or policies, we have to ensure it translates into action — securing real and affordable access to birth control and abortion for women and girls.

While we have a long way to go before reproductive justice is a reality for everyone, the looming possibility of an anti-choice administration (and all that this would entail) has serious implications for women and girls in the U.S. and, through policies that restrict the use of U.S. development aid overseas, women and girls around the world. Your voice is important.

Our goals are substantial and clear. We need to become involved — to educate one another and ourselves on the nuances of abortion rights and access; defend the fast dwindling numbers of abortion clinics and abortion providers nationwide; express our outrage when they are attacked and vilified; demand greater and equal access to all reproductive health services including affordable and safe birth control and abortion care; counter misleading and dishonest anti-abortion propaganda and hold the people behind these tactics accountable for their actions.

Doing this effectively will require creativity, tenacity and abiding respect of all women’s realities and circumstances. We’re up for the challenge — are you?