The Bush administration is poised to “grant sweeping new protections to health care providers who oppose abortion and other procedures on religious or moral grounds,” despite the fact the rule change has provoked a “torrent of objections, including a strenuous protest from the government agency that enforces job discrimination laws,” writes Robert Pear in The New York Times.
It’s not just access to reproductive health services that will be affected. Once the new Health and Human services rule is implemented, it would would also prevent hospitals, clinics, doctors’ offices and drugstores from requiring employees with religious or moral objections to “assist in the performance of any part of a health service program or research activity” that receives funding from HHS.
Opposition has been intense — the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, 28 senators, more than 110 representatives and the attorneys general of 13 states are against the rule, according to the Times.
Officials from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission — including its legal counsel, who was appointed by Bush — also are against it. Still, it’s clear the Bush administration is hell-bent on pushing through the rule, despite critics’ warnings that it would upset decades of court decisions that had weighed “employees’ rights to religious freedom and employers’ business needs.”
The “provider conscience” rule has missed the deadline by which new regulations are supposed to be issued, but the White House can waive the deadline “in extraordinary circumstances.” The Times notes that the White House was “unable to say immediately why an exception might be justified in this case.”
It seems clear, however, once you look at who’s supporting the rule — social conservatives, like the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, who have been pushing the administration to take a stronger stand against abortion and contraception.
Rachel previously wrote about the dangers of this HHS rule. We’ll be keeping an eye on updates to the situation. Birth Control Watch and RH Reality Check are also good places to check in with for background and the latest news.
One silver lining is that aides to President-elect Barack Obama said he would try to rescind the law upon taking office, though the process could take three to six months.
During that time, rape victims may no longer learn about emergency contraception and Medicaid recipients could be denied certain prescriptions — all because Bush couldn’t resist playing politics with women’s health.
The Washington Post today features a page-one story on efforts to reduce — not ban — abortion.
The emphasis on reduction is in part a response to the political reality of an Obama administration that will not be appointing Supreme Court justices who favor overturning Roe v. Wade, and the fact that several key ballot measures restricting access to abortion were defeated.
It’s also a reflection of the ongoing efforts of the “common ground” movement, which has been bringing together abortion foes and women’s rights supporters around issues they can agree on, such as providing more medical and economic support for pregnant women. President-elect Barack Obama actively supported this approach during the campaign.
And yet, as Jacqueline L. Salmon explains, some abortion foes aren’t interested in anything other than moral certitude:
The new effort is causing a fissure in the antiabortion movement, with traditional groups viewing the activists as traitors to their cause. Leaders worry that the approach could gain traction with a more liberal Congress and president, although they do not expect it to weaken hard-core opposition.
“It’s a sellout, as far as we are concerned,” said Joe Scheidler, founder of the Pro-Life Action League. “We don’t think it’s really genuine. You don’t have to have a lot of social programs to cut down on abortions.”
The diverse group that has come together to try a different tack includes prominent pastors such as Joel Hunter; Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference; Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good; Sojourners, a progressive evangelical organization; and RealAbortionSolutions.org, a coalition of Catholics and evangelical leaders.
Others include Catholics United, a progressive Catholic lay group; Richard Cizik, vice president for governmental affairs of the National Association of Evangelicals; the Rev. Thomas Reese of Georgetown University’s Woodstock Theological Center, a prominent Jesuit thinker; and Nicholas Cafardi, former dean of the Duquesne University School of Law and a Catholic canon lawyer.
Their actions have not come without consequences. Cafardi resigned from the board of Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio after writing a column supporting Obama and declaring the abortion battle lost. Kmiec has received hate e-mail, and a priest denied him Communion in April. And Denver Archbishop Charles J. Chaput has criticized Kmiec and several of the groups involved, saying they have “undermined the progress pro-lifers have made and provided an excuse for some Catholics to abandon the abortion issue.”
Double Dose: Obama’s Pre-Inauguration Boom for Women’s Health; Baby in the Home (and Garden); Changing the Culture of Rape Prevention; Prescription Drugs Deliver Phthalates …
Obama Does More for Women’s Health Pre-Inauguration Than Bush in 8 Years: “President-Elect Obama has not been inaugurated yet and, already, he’s taken some critical steps towards restoring the United States as a leader in global women’s health,” writes Amie Newman at RH Reality Check. Newman goes on to identify global reproductive and sexual health mandates that Obama has prioritized since he won the election way back on, oh, Nov. 4.
Baby, You’re in the Home (and Garden): The New York Times published a cool story on the increasing number of women opting for home births (still a very small percentage of all births) that took a very New-York perspective: How does one give birth in a small apartment — especially if the room is filled with family and the walls between neighbors are thin?
If the story had left it there, it’s placement in the Home & Garden section might have been more justified. But as it reads — complete with condemnation of home births from the American Medical Association — it’s better suited for Health.
Plus: Don’t miss the related slide show of home births. And here’s a great trivia question: Who was the first American president to be born in a hospital? Answer: Jimmy Carter.
Sexual Assault on Campus - Changing the Culture: Terrific story in the Star Tribune about rape prevention programs on college campuses that focus on men. Check out the intro below, and be sure to read the rest:
Tyler Jones was tipping back a couple of beers with friends at a Dinkytown bar when he suddenly had to take a stand.
“Hey, see that girl over there?” Jones recalled an acquaintance asking, nodding toward a woman he wanted to take home. “She’s almost drunk. Not quite drunk enough. … What shot should I buy her?”
There was a time, Jones says, when he might have laughed off the remark. Not anymore.
“You want to buy her something really strong to like, basically knock her out?” Jones, a University of Minnesota senior, recalled saying. “Man, that’s not right. That’s rape. That’s sexual assault.”
The acquaintance looked stunned. “Whatever,” he mumbled, and walked away.
It was one moment at one bar. But it’s also a sign of a big shift in strategy on campuses trying to tackle a culture that some say tolerates sexual assault. Instead of teaching women not to walk alone at night or to carry Mace, some colleges are trying something much harder — changing college men. Jones, fresh from sex assault prevention training, is in the vanguard of the movement.
Women Gain Some Access, but Not Political Power: “Women still lag far behind men in top political and decision-making roles, though their access to education and health care is nearly equal, the World Economic Forum said Wednesday,” reports Reuters. “In its 2008 Global Gender Gap report, the forum, a Swiss research organization, ranked Norway, Finland and Sweden as the countries that have the most equality of the sexes, and Saudi Arabia, Chad and Yemen as having the least.”
Where does the United States rank? A measly 27th — below Germany (11th), Britain (13th), France (15th), Lesotho (16th), Trinidad and Tobago (19th), South Africa (22nd), Argentina (24th) and Cuba (25th). Here’s the full report (PDF).
The EPA’s Stalin Era: Yes, it really has been that bad, reports Rebecca Claren at Salon. To wit: “[T]he story of the hundreds of sick people who live near the former Kelly Air Force Base illuminates an entirely new manner in which the Bush administration has diluted science and put public health at risk. This year, largely in obeisance to the Pentagon, the nation’s biggest polluter, the White House diminished a little-known but critical process at the Environmental Protection Agency for assessing toxic chemicals that impacts thousands of Americans.”
Prescription Drugs May Deliver Phthalates: We’ve written before about the potential dangers of phthalates — chemical compounds commonly found in plastics, perfumes and lotions that are linked to reproductive abnormalities. But this one is news to me: Environmental Health News reports that prescription drugs can deliver high doses of phthalates.
“At least 47 prescription medications — including the colitis drug Asacol, an antacid and an HIV drug — contain phthalates, according to scientists at the Harvard School of Public Health and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” writes Marla Cone.
Victoria’s Toxic Secret: Feminist Peace Network picks up the story concerning allegations that Victoria’s Secret’s bras are causing skin irritations. The suspect irritant? Formaldehyde.
Racial Barriers Between Doctors and Patients: “In politics, the racial barriers might have fallen, I thought, but what about in health care?” asks Pauline Chen, MD, in her latest doctor/patient column in The New York Times. Chen looks not only at the striking health care disparities and racial inequality, but also at the experiences of minority physicians:
Of all the surgical residents I trained with, “Eric” was easily one of the smartest. He possessed a great bedside manner, brilliant clinical skills and plenty of that Obama cool. Eric was African-American, and one night, when we were both on call together, he told me something I have never forgotten.
“You know, Pauline,” he said, “there are a lot of times when I go to a patient’s room for the first time and they ask me, ‘Are you transport? Are you here to wheel me to radiology?’” I can remember Eric shaking his head as he spoke. “They never assume I’m one of the doctors.”
Supreme Court Hears Gun Rights Case: Allison Stevens of Women’s eNews explains a gun-control case heard before the Supreme Court this week that could effect abusers’ access to guns in some states.
If the justices side with the U.S. government’s challenge — which argues the law should not be restricted to just a portion of the states — batterers in every state and territory would be subject to the gun control ban.
If the court rejects the government’s reading of the law and limits the application of the law to those states with specific anti-domestic violence laws, safety advocates are apprehensive that thousands of abusers across the country will be erased from criminal lists, giving them new access to guns, said Peter Hamm, a spokesperson for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a group in Washington, D.C., that lobbies for gun control.
Double Dose: Ending Eight Years of Failed Women’s Health Policies; State Ballot Initiatives; More Analysis on Prop 8; Sarah Palin and Feminism - Once More for the Road
Sure we’ll be back to other health news soon, but first here’s a wrap on presidential politics and women’s health priorities. And, just to remind you that voting feels oh-so-good, Babeland’s voter discount continues through Nov. 11. Enjoy!
Yes We Can … End Eight Years of Failed Women’s Health Policies: Sign the RH Reality Check petition, which asks President-elect Barack Obama to:
Defund failed abstinence only programs in favor of proven, effective comprehensive sex ed programs,
Reinstate global family planning funds that save women’s health and lives and overturn the Global Gag Rule,
Take action on ensuring availability of publicly funded contraception for low-income women and women in poverty,
Immediately implement your HIV/AIDS domestic agenda,
Pass FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act) that overturns dangerous anti-choice state legislation, and
Protect Roe v. Wade.
Plus: Theresa Braine, writing at Women’s eNews, notes that women’s groups aren’t wasting any time organizing around priorities: “From fixing the domestic health-care system and the economy, to making child care more accessible to working mothers, to rescinding the so-called global gag rule that cuts off foreign aid to groups that provide abortion or counseling, or even lobby for changes in abortion laws, women’s groups started exercising the type of grassroots activism that political analysts say helped bring the Democrats to power on Tuesday.”
What’s On the Agenda (So Far): Here’s the new Obama-Biden administration’s agenda on issues addressing women. Health care is up there at the top.
Health Care Ballot Initiatives: A wrap-up of several health care measures that passed on state ballots.
Why Prop 8 Won: “If exit polls are to be believed, some 70 percent of African-Americans voted Yes on 8, as did 52 percent of Latinos and 49 percent of Asians; each of these demographics went heavily for Obama, blacks by a 94-to-6 margin,” writes Richard Kim, associate editor of The Nation.
The easy, dangerous explanation for this gap, and one already tossed around by some white gay liberals in the bitter aftermath, is that people of color are not so secretly homophobic. But a more complicated reckoning — one that takes into account both the organizing successes of the Christian right and the failures of the gay movement — will have to take place if activists want a different result next time. First, there’s the matter of the Yes on 8 coalition’s staggering disinformation campaign.
The Mom on the Bus: Jodi Kantor has a great piece up at the The Caucus blog about covering the presidential and raising her daughter, Talia, who is almost 3.
Sayonara, Sarah: Katha Pollitt bids good-bye to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, but not without first explaining how Palin was a gift to feminism –
[T]he first way Palin was good for feminism is that she helped us clarify what it isn’t: feminism doesn’t mean voting for “the woman” just because she’s female, and it doesn’t mean confusing self-injury with empowerment, like the Ellen Jamesians in The World According to Garp (I’ll vote for the forced-childbirth candidate, that’ll show Howard Dean!). It isn’t just feel-good “you go, girl” appreciation of female moxie, which I cheerfully acknowledge Palin has by the gallon. As I wrote when she was selected, if she were my neighbor I would probably like her — at least until she organized with her fellow Christians to ban abortion at the local hospital, as Palin did in the 1990s. [...]
Second, Palin’s presence on the Republican ticket forced family-values conservatives to give public support to working mothers, equal marriages, pregnant teens and their much-maligned parents. Talk-show frothers, Christian zealots and professional antifeminists — Rush Limbaugh and Phyllis Schlafly — insisted that a mother of five, including a “special-needs” newborn, could perfectly well manage governing a state (a really big state, as we were frequently reminded), while simultaneously running for veep and, who knows, field-dressing a moose. No one said she belonged at home. No one said she was neglecting her husband or failing to be appropriately submissive to him. No one blamed her for 17-year-old Bristol’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy or hard-partying high-school-dropout boyfriend. No one even wondered out loud why Bristol wasn’t getting married before the baby arrived. All these things have officially morphed from sins to “challenges,” just part of normal family life. No matter how strategic this newfound broadmindedness is, it will not be easy to row away from it.
Good morning, readers! By now you all know that Barack Obama is our President-Elect. However, a number of specific reproductive health issues were up for a vote in this election - RH Reality Check has great coverage of the fate of anti-choice ballot initiatives in this election (links below), and Feministing has a good summary.
The stand-out negative of the election? Prop 8 — the California ballot proposition to amend the state’s Constitution to eliminate any rights to same-sex marriage, officially designating marriage as “between a man and woman” — has passed. You can find out more here.
The Center for Reproductive Rights has issued a call on “President-Elect Barack Obama to champion women’s reproductive freedom and equality and restore America’s leadership on these issues.” In their letter [PDF], the Center asks for reproductive health policies guided by science, not ideology, judicial appointments that support established rights, and support of reproductive rights and health in foreign assistance programs.
With less than one week to go until Election Day, we’re taking a look at some of the women’s health issues at stake. Want to add more? Leave links to blog entries or other resources in the comments.
One other note — I can’t believe some folks aren’t voting. If you know anyone who plans on sitting this one out, please urge them to consider the importance of their vote on local and state issues, in addition to what’s obviously a national turning point for women’s reproductive rights and access to health care.
Through the stories of seven “fictional women,” each with a different set of health problems and insurance coverage, readers can understand what each candidates’ health reform plan means to them. The report was published by the Connors Center for Women’s Health and Gender Biology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
And don’t forget Kaiser Family Foundation’s excellent Health08.org, which includes in-depth comparisons of the candidates’ health care plans and positions on issues.
Turning to ballot propositions, USC’s Initiative and Referendum Institute (IRI) offers a good overview (PDF) of the 153 ballot propositions before voters in 36 states, including headline issues of same-sex marriage and abortion (also the subject of discussion on Monday’s “Talk of the Nation”).
Measures to ban gay marriage are on the ballot in California, Arizona and Florida, with most eyes on California, which the IRI refers to as a “critical firewall in the battle over gay marriage.” This document (PDF) analyzes the likelihood of passage in each of the three states, and it features a list of all same-sex marriage propositions. Did you know that 29 of 30 measures banning same-sex marriage — some proposed by initiative, others by state legislatures — have passed?
BallotPedia.org is another comprehensive site. It’s easy to search and it does a nice job of listing initiatives by category, including abortion, marriage and health care. These pages include not only this year’s ballot items, but also initiatives coming up next year — and even those that failed to get on the ballot. Very cool.
Here’s a look at some of the discussions on three specific ballot items:
1. Colorado Amendment 48 Definition of Person: This amendment seeks to define “person” and grant constitutional rights from the “moment of fertilization.” It’s also been tied to “Horton Hears a Who” (”a person’s a person, no matter how small”) — much to the consternation of thinking Dr. Seuss fans everywhere.
Emergency contraception for rape and incest victims would be banned. By giving legal rights to fertilized eggs, this amendment could ban birth control options like the Pill and IUD’s. (These kinds of birth control can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.)
Establishing rights from the moment of fertilization would ban some stem cell research being used to find cures for chronic disease and disabilities. In vitro fertilization could be banned since fertilized eggs used in these processes would have full legal rights.
A woman with cancer could be denied access to life saving medical treatment because it could endanger a fertilized egg.
Former U.S. Rep. Patricia Schroeder recently wrote: “Years ago, when I was asked how I could be both a mother and a Congresswoman, I replied, ‘I have a brain and a uterus and I use both.’ On November 4, I urge Coloradans to use their brains and protect women’s uteruses. Vote no on Amendment 48.”
2. South Dakota Abortion Ban Initiative: Following South Dakota’s failed attempt in 2006 to ban abortion, this kindler, gentler initiative “now makes convoluted exceptions for rape, incest and, when there is a full moon and Mount Rushmore spouts Strawberry Quik, the health or life of the woman.” It’s being pushed by anti-choice activist Leslee Unruh, who has trouble following the facts of life (including her own).
South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families has an incredible amount of useful information, including statements in opposition to the initiative submitted by the South Dakota State Medical Association and the South Dakota section of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Plus: Katha Pollitt this week spotlightsWomen Run! South Dakota, the umbrella organization for progressive pro-choice Native American women running for the state legislature.
The initiative purports to protect California girls from dangers associated with abortions by requiring that their parents be notified. But Proposition 4 attempts to solve something that isn’t much of a problem. There’s no evidence that California’s teenage girls are harmed by abortions with any frequency, whether or not their parents have been notified. [...]
In fact, under the guise of protecting underage girls, this proposal really is just the latest attempt to impose any obstacle in the exercise of reproductive freedom. This represents the third try in recent years to pass such a measure. California should reject it again.
The editorial goes on to note, in no uncertain terms, the ridiculousness of the measures included to protect girls in abusive situations:
Proposition 4’s writers say they crafted a measure that would permit girls in potentially abusive situations to get an abortion without their parents being notified. To do so, they would need to tell another adult relative. But a girl can use this option only if she makes a written accusation alleging that her parents are repeat child abusers, with the complaint to be turned over to authorities. Spoiler language like this makes it hard to believe that Proposition 4 is chiefly about girls’ safety.
Read more editorials against Proposition 4. Planned Parenthood has posted a number of videos about how the proposition would endanger teens, including the one below, “Jane’s Journey,” which shows the complexity of the judicial maze that teens would be forced to navigate if they can’t talk to their parents.
The authors explain that “many NGOs are preparing to give input to Congress’s considerations for reforming the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act,” but that “overhauling the Foreign Assistance Act will achieve nothing unless policy makers embrace the principle of advancing human rights, specifically by prioritizing the wellbeing, rights, and empowerment of women.” In examining the Millennium Development Goals, they argue that goals of reducing child mortality and poverty, improving maternal health, improving access education, combating HIV/AIDS and other diseases, and other goals all depend on Goal 3, which specifically calls for gender equality and the empowerment of women.
The authors also note that other organizations such as Oxfam have made proposals with important recommendations for reform, but that these existing recommendations “fail to address sexual and reproductive health and rights and women’s equality, even though these have been identified as critical components to global development.”
Among the topics and U.S. activities discussed in the report as hindering the achievement of development goals are prohibitions against prostitution, the Global Gag Rule, the withholding of UNFPA funds, and the push for abstinence-based programs. CHANGE proposes 6 specific reforms, including:
“Eliminate restrictions (including the Mexico City Policy, Anti-Prostitution Loyalty Oath, and denial of funding for UNFPA) and unnecessary reporting requirements, and fund comprehensive sexual and reproductive health programs that integrate HIV prevention based on human rights and public health best practices, allowing communities to determine what interventions meet their needs.”
Other recommendations include the creation of cabinet-level posts on global development and women, aligning U.S. foreign assistance with ICPD Programme of Action and the Millennium Development Goals, greater transparency in U.S. foreign policy goals on sexual and reproductive health, affirming the sexual and reproductive rights of all people, and getting funding directly into the hands of grassroots groups and women.
Double Dose: Health Insurance Shifts from Employer-Based to Individual Market; Pharmacy Refuses to Sell Birth Control, and in Virginia, That’s OK; “Free to Be You and Me” Turns 35; 2009 Sheroes; Sexy Costumes …
The New Health Insurance Model: In the first of a three-part series, the L.A. Times looks at the changing insurance scenario — where once working Americans could rely on employer-based benefits, now more people are being forced into the individual market, where coverage is costly, bare-bones and precarious.
Plus: Read more about how the individual health insurance market fails women. It’s a great report from the National Women’s Law Center.
No Candy or Condoms: Divine Mercy Care Pharmacy in Chantilly, Va., drew attention this week for becoming at least the seventh pharmacy in the United States to refuse to sell contraceptives of any kind, even if a person has a prescription. The decision, say owners, is guided by Roman Catholic teachings, though the pharmacy is not affiliated with the Catholic church. Still, it did receive a blessing from Arlington Bishop Paul S. Loverde. From the AP:
“This pharmacy is a vibrant example of our Holy Father’s charge to all of us to wear our faith in the public square,” said Loverde, who sprinkled holy water on the shelves stocked with painkillers and acne treatments. “It will allow families to shop in an environment where their faith is not compromised.”
Too bad everyone can’t shop in an environment where their health is not compromised. In Virginia, pharmacists can turn away any prescription — for any reason.
Prop What?: Heather at Scarleteen gives a good overview of several important ballot measures that will be up for vote Nov. 4 in states from Arkansas to South Dakota, “such as parental notification laws for minors who want an abortion, age of consent laws, same-sex marriage, civil rights, stem cell research, education issues, even a proposal to lower the voting age for primaries in one state (whoohoo!) and another to ban abortion outright (grrrr).”
Plus: Look up ballot measures for your state here.
2009 Sheroes: Next year’s Sheroes Womyn Warriors calendar is now available for sale (check out the beautiful cover art by Ekua Holmes!). The calendar honors change agents, rebels, radicals and revolutionaries of different times and places around the globe.
“This is definitely not a ‘great women of history’ celebrity calendar,” reads the back cover. Instead, this is a calendar “of womyn who have challenged their societies and who have advanced the struggle of the oppressed and exploited.”
Proceeds support the Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights at Simmons College.
Seen But Not Heard: Jeannine Stein at the L.A. Times writes: “Researchers at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in Lubbock interviewed eight overweight women ages 20 to 61 to learn about their experiences with the healthcare system, then published their findings in this month’s Journal of Advanced Nursing. During interviews about their experiences, four themes became apparent: struggling to fit in, feeling not quite human, being dismissed, and refusing to give up.”
Scary Sexy Costumes for Kids: “Halloween costumes are reflecting an increasingly sexualized childhood. They often reflect the stars and starlets and popular culture role models that girls have, starting with Disney princesses or Hannah Montana when girls are young. But even traditional favorites, like witches and pirates are sexier every year. And French maids are quite the thing for tweens and teens,” said Diane E. Levin in a Q&A about Halloween costumes and gender roles.
Levin is co-author with Jean Kilbourne of “So Sexy So Soon: The New Sexualized Childhood and What Parents Can Do to Protect Their Kids.”
Life’s Lessons: On the other side of what’s good for kids, “Free to Be You and Me,” which has never gone out of print since its 1973 debut, was reissued this month with a new, expanded edition, reports USA Today.
Jessica Reaves of the Chicago Tribune, who also made her debut in 1973, writes about the book’s appeal and the lessons that have remained incredibly relevant for more than three decades:
Some critics of “Free to Be” accused Thomas of advancing a radical feminist agenda. They pointed to the book’s co-producer (the Ms. Foundation for Women) and Thomas’ role on “That Girl,” the first television program to shamelessly promote the career girl lifestyle. (I mean, really: Ann Marie strung that poor Don along for four years before she finally agreed to marry him!)
As a feminist born into a family of feminists, I’m biased: I happen to think adopting a feminist agenda is the best thing that could ever happen to this country. (Trust me, it hasn’t happened yet.) But those long-ago critics were right about one thing. The witty, wise lessons of “Free to Be” do underscore feminism’s fundamental tenet: namely, that everyone — male, female, black, white, brown, young, old and in between — should be treated equally and empathetically. Yes, even the jerks.
You only need to glance at the headlines to know we’re not quite ready to cross that particular item off our collective to-do list. Which isn’t to say we haven’t learned a lot in the 35 years since “Free to Be” was published. It’s just that we may need another 35 years for it all to sink in.
While issues that greatly affect women have hardly been front and center during this presidential campaign, there was one moment during last night’s debate, when the subject turned to abortion, that Sen. John McCain kissed the votes of moderate women voters good-bye.
McCain was attacking Sen. Barack Obama for being in cahoots “with the extreme aspect of the pro-abortion movement” (the what?) because, as a member of the Illinois State Senate, Obama voted against the so-called partial-birth abortion ban.
Obama explained that he did so because there was no exception for the life or health of the mother, to which McCain responded, complete with air quotes:
Just again — just again the example of the eloquence of Senator Obama. He’s — health of the mother. You know, that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement, in America, to mean almost anything. That’s — that’s the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, “health.”
I’m with Nicole Belle at Crooks and Liars, who writes: “Clearly, in all his debate prep, no one thought to coach McCain not to go to the third rail of the abortion issue. Boy, was that an oversight. Because not only did McCain go there, he jumped right on to it. [...] Not a legitimate concern? Tell that to these women.”
The story Belle points to is about women whose lives were saved by late-term abortions.
If you managed to miss the moment, you can watch the exchange below:
Double Dose: Gay Marriage Legal in CT; Ad Council Introduces First Campaign on Gay/Lesbian Issues; CCR Sues Over Required Ultrasound in Oklahoma; South Dakota Abortion Ban 2.0; One-Year Update on Gardasil
Gay Marriage Legal in California, Massachusetts and now Connecticut: The Connecticut Supreme Court on Friday struck down the state’s civil union law with a 4-3 ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. From The New York Times:
The ruling, which cannot be appealed and is to take effect on Oct. 28, held that a state law limiting marriage to heterosexual couples, and a civil union law intended to provide all the rights and privileges of marriage to same-sex couples, violated the constitutional guarantees of equal protection under the law.
Striking at the heart of discriminatory traditions in America, the court — in language that often rose above the legal landscape into realms of social justice for a new century — recalled that laws in the not-so-distant past barred interracial marriages, excluded women from occupations and official duties, and relegated blacks to separate but supposedly equal public facilities.
View the full ruling here (PDF). Opponents spoke of steps to enact a constitional ban on same-sex marriage, but on Friday night the plaintiffs in the original court case filed four years ago and their supporters were jubilant.
Garret Stack, 59, introduced his partner, John Anderson, 63, and said: “For 28 years we have been engaged. We can now register at Home Depot and prepare for marriage.”
Group Sues Over Required Ultrasound: The Center for Reproductive Rights has filed a challenge to an Oklahoma law that mandates a woman must have an ultrasound and listen to the doctor describe what her fetus looks like before she have an abortion. And that’s not all:
At the same time, the law prevents a woman from suing her doctor if he or she intentionally withholds other information about the fetus, such as a severe developmental defect. The statute also requires doctors to use a specific regimen for administering the medical abortion pill, despite that regimen being less effective and more costly than the one strongly recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).
The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Oklahoma County District Court, says the requirement intrudes on a woman’s privacy, endangers her health and assaults her dignity.
Set to go into effect on Nov. 1, the law would make Oklahoma the fourth state to require the viewing of ultrasounds before an abortion. The other states are Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi.
South Dakota Abortion Ban 2.0: Lynn Harris of Broadsheeet offers a full, and funny, assessment:
The ban’s primary liability, according to polls, was that it contained virtually no exceptions. But as ringleader Leslee Unruh of Vote Yes for Life said at the time, like Jason popping up out of Crystal Lake, “We started something here in South Dakota.” And now, as you may have heard, abortion opponents there are aiming to get the job done. Which means: The ban is back (PDF), in sheep’s clothing. It now makes convoluted exceptions for rape, incest and, when there is a full moon and Mount Rushmore spouts Strawberry Quik, the health or life of the woman.
Unruh (who says that over 90 percent of women seeking abortion are using it as “birth control”) calls Abortion Ban 2.0 “more moderate, more reasonable, more of a middle ground.” Yeah … no.
Birth Control Watch: While some voters think access to birth control is not a political issue, those of us who follow the activities of the Bush administration and legislatures around the country know better. Birth Control Watch has a great section on federal and state proposals that will limit our individual decision making and access — it’s called extreme schemes.
An excellent resource to pass along, it includes information on Colorado Proposition 48, a constitutional amendment that seeks to establish legal personhood from the moment of fertilization (which even self-described “pro-life” Catholic Gov. Bill Ritter opposes), and the proposed HHS regulations that would limit patients’ access to information and services.
The two-minute activist gives a concise run-down of actions you can take, and the press room tracks related stories.
Speaking of the HHS regulations, more than 150 Congressional Democrats stated their opposition in letters to HHS. The Senate letter concludes that the proposed rule is “damaging to the health care needs of women, their families and all Americans and will only serve to cause havoc, not clarity, among employers and employees in the health care field.”
Courts Failing Domestic Violence Victims: “For every man convicted in a Cook County court of beating his wife or girlfriend, five men brought in on similar charges walk away legally unscathed. And despite official promises to help women pursue abuse complaints, that conviction rate is only getting worse,” reports the Chicago Tribune.
The Trib also looks at a specialized unit of the Cook County state’s attorney office with a much higher conviction rate. The unit, Target Abuser Call, employs a more intensive investigatory approach for the most serious cases.
Plus: Programs for batterers are underfunded but should be supported to break the habit of abuse, say domestic violence experts. “No matter how many women you take in, it isn’t going to cure the problem,” said Toby Myers, vice chair of the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence.
Plus: A judge in Canada tells a woman not to bother calling police if she goes back to her partner. via Feministing
Nobel Prize Winners: The 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine went to Harald zur Hausen of Germany, who discovered the human papilloma viruses that causes cervical cancer, and Luc Montagnier and Francoise Barre-Sinoussi, French researchers who discovered HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
Montagnier and Barre-Sinoussi later told President Nicolas Sarkozy that they fear the world financial crisis will affect funding to fight AIDS.
One-Year Distribution Update On Gardasil: “About a quarter of the nation’s teenage girls received the controversial cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil last year in its first full year of distribution, federal authorities said Thursday,” reports the L.A. Times.
The Realities of Addiction: Writing in the Washington Post, Jacqueline M. Duda shares the painful story of her daughter’s drug addiction and death — including the difficulty the family had finding adequate medical treatment for addiction.
“Surely, we thought, college-educated suburbanites like us could locate professional help: drug counselors, doctors, therapists specializing in addiction. Surely detoxification centers would treat desperate addicts and work out a payment plan. Surely we could check her into some kind of residential treatment program with a minimum of delay,” writes Duda. “We were wrong.”
PSA to Raise Awareness Around “That’s So Gay”: “For the first time since the Advertising Council was founded in 1942, the organization — which directs and coordinates public service campaigns on behalf of Madison Avenue and the media industry — is introducing ads meant to tackle a social issue of concern to gays and lesbians,” writes Stuart Elliot in The New York Times.
The campaign, created pro bono by the New York office of Arnold Worldwide, urges an end to using derogatory language, particularly labeling anything deemed negative or unpleasant as “so gay.” That is underlined by the theme of the campaign: “When you say, ‘That’s so gay,’ do you realize what you say? Knock it off.”
There will be television and radio commercials, print and outdoor ads and a special Web site devoted to the campaign (thinkb4youspeak.com). Some spots feature celebrities, the young actress Hilary Duff and the comedian Wanda Sykes, delivering the message.
Double Dose: Palin Condoms; Dispute Over Vaccines Reframed as Catfight; Chicago’s Toxic Air; Black Midwives Conference Oct. 10-12; Pregnant Women & Medical Research; Questioning the “War on Fat”
And did you know that as of Sept. 26, Planned Parenthood took in more $802,678 in donations from 31,313 people made in Sarah Palin’s name?
Donations poured in after an anonymous email was circulated urging donations in any amount and recommending that the personalized thank-you card from Planned Parenthood be sent to Palin at the McCain-Palin campaign headquarters in Virginia.
L.A. Times columnist Patt Morrison took credit for the fundraising, recalling how she first made a similar suggestion after President Bush took office in January 2001.
Every donation generated a “thank you card.” I envisioned a scene out of “Miracle on 34th Street,” sacks and sacks of thank-you cards from Planned Parenthood, delivered to Bush in the Oval Office.
It worked. Boy, did it. Ultimately, more than a million dollars, I was told, was generated for Planned Parenthood in Bush’s name. George Bush became one of the biggest money-generators in Planned Parenthood’s history. The idea won me an award from Planned Parenthood, and a splash in Ms. Magazine. So I am delighted that my ”Mother of All Ironic Donations” notion has been revived for Palin.
Chicago’s Toxic Air: Proving real journalism still happens at the Tribune, here’s the intro to a special report on toxic air pollution:
People living in Chicago and nearby suburbs face some of the highest risks in the nation for cancer, lung disease and other health problems linked to toxic chemicals pouring from industry smokestacks, according to a Tribune analysis of federal data.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency spent millions of dollars to assess the dangers that air pollution poses but has failed to fulfill promises to make the research more accessible to the public. So the Tribune is posting the information on its Web site, where users can easily find nearby polluters and the chemicals going into their air.
Those who look up Cook County will see it ranked worst in the nation for dangerous air pollution, based on 2005 data. The Tribune also found Chicago was among the 10 worst cities in the U.S.
Plus: The Trib also published a searchable database of health-risk information (based on the EPA’s Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) database) and the health effects of long-term exposure to various industry-produced chemicals.
Bioethicists Challenge Reticence to Include Pregnant Women in Medical Research: A paper to be posted online and later in print in the November edition of the International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics (IJFAB) argues why more pregnant women must be included in medical research.
“As a society we are ethically obliged to confront the complex challenges of pregnant women in research, otherwise we relegate all expectant mothers to second-class medical citizens,” said Ruth Faden, director of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, in this press release about the journal article.
“One of the key messages of this paper is that progress will not happen until we shift the burden of justification from inclusion to exclusion and to an explicit commitment to studying the effects of drugs in pregnancy,” Faden added.
Midwives Fight AMA to Provide Black Maternal Care: “Shafia Monroe’s sixth annual International Black Midwives and Healers Conference, taking place in New York’s Harlem neighborhood Oct. 10-12, comes in the middle of a showdown between home-birth midwives and the American Medical Association,” writes Malena Amusa at Women’s eNews.
The AMA wants to bar licensing to certified professional midwives, who specialize in out-of-hospital births (births at home and in birthing centers) and is backing state legislation that restricts licensing to nurse midwives who have additional nursing training and certification required to work in hospitals.
“Certified professional midwives are a critical component to meet the growing maternal health needs in the black community,” said Monroe, noting that every sort of midwife is needed to reduce maternal morality rates among African American women.
Top Psychiatrist Didn’t Report Drug Makers’ Pay: “One of the nation’s most influential psychiatrists earned more than $2.8 million in consulting arrangements with drug makers from 2000 to 2007, failed to report at least $1.2 million of that income to his university and violated federal research rules, according to documents provided to Congressional investigators,” reports Gardiner Harris in The New York Times. “The psychiatrist, Dr. Charles B. Nemeroff of Emory University, is the most prominent figure to date in a series of disclosures that is shaking the world of academic medicine and seems likely to force broad changes in the relationships between doctors and drug makers.”
Cancer Research Briefing: Bloggers recently had a chance to discuss the current state of cancer research and biotechnology with Dr. Gil G. Mor, an associate professor at Yale Medical School and director of Reproductive Immunology and Translational Research in Gynecologic Oncology, and Lori Lober, who was diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer in 2000 and has maintained a diagnosis of “no evidence of disease” for five years.
Treating Vascular Disease in Women: Arterial vascular disease is underdiagnosed and undertreated in older women, according to studies. Earlier this year, medical experts met to discuss the differences between men and women when it comes to the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of vascular diseases such as heart attacks and strokes. Out of that symposium came newly released recommendations for improving research on sex differences.
Losing the Weight Stigma: The Idea Lab section of The New York Times Sunday Magazine questions the “war on fat” and offers examples of how academics and activists are emphasizing health over weight. Robin Marantz Henig writes:
This is a core argument of fat acceptance: that it’s possible to be healthy no matter how fat you are and that weight loss as a goal is futile, unnecessary and counterproductive — and that fatness is nobody’s business but your own.
Many fat-acceptance activists prefer a new approach to dieting that focuses on nutrition, exercise and body image. A new book out this fall, “Health at Every Size,” by Linda Bacon, a nutritionist and physiologist at the University of California at Davis, outlines this approach, which is less about dieting than a lifestyle change that emphasizes “intuitive eating”: listening to hunger signals, eating when you’re hungry, choosing nutritious food over junk. It encourages exercise, but for its emotional and physical benefits, not as a way to lose weight. It advocates tossing out the bathroom scale and loving your body no matter what it weighs.
The philosophy is migrating slowly into mainstream programs, like a spa in Vermont that focuses on “acceptance of ourselves and our wonderful sizes.” But the spas and other programs have trouble with the bottom line of fat acceptance — rejection of weight loss as a goal. Weight Watchers, for instance, uses some of the same slogans, and while it promotes its program as “not a diet,” it still tracks weight loss down to the decimal point.
2009 Sheroes: Next year’s 
