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:

Remember how South Dakota’s 2006 Margaret Atwood honorary abortion ban was defeated in referendum by a (none-too-cushy) 55-44 margin?

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.

Plus: Visit South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families for more information.

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.

Check out the Wanda Sykes PSA below:

Linda Hirshman, a lawyer whose most recent book is “Get to Work: A Manifesto for Women of the World,” addresses that question in this Washington Post piece. Here’s the frightening intro:

In the 1980s, when abortion was severely limited in then-West Germany, border guards sometimes required German women returning from foreign trips to undergo vaginal examinations to make sure that they hadn’t illegally terminated a pregnancy while they were abroad. According to news stories and other accounts, the guards would stop young women and ask them about drugs, then look for evidence of abortion, such as sanitary pads or nightgowns, in their cars, and eventually force them to undergo a medical examination — as West German law empowered them to do.

Sounds like a nightmare of a police state, doesn’t it? Like something that could never happen in this day and age — and certainly not in the United States? But depending upon the outcome of this presidential election, it could happen here. This is how.

Continue reading …

Plus: Hirshman today hosted an online discussion about the restrictions states may place on abortions and women seeking them if Roe v. Wade is overturned.

In a proclamation recognizing that Alaska has “the highest per capital occurrence of sexual assault in the nation at 2.5 times the national average,” Gov. Sarah Palin earlier this year proclaimed the month of April “Sexual Assault Awareness Month.”

But her record still doesn’t show that she gets it.

As mayor of Wasilla, where she served for two terms between 1996 and 2002, Palin hired a police chief with a highly offensive and unusual attitude toward crime investigation: making victims of sexual assault pay for their own forensic exams as part of the crime investigation.

It’s an incredible story that’s making the rounds today.

In 2000, then Alaska Gov. Tony Knowles signed legislation that put an end to police departments billing victims for the tests, but the Wasilla police chief was none too happy about the switch. From the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (May 23, 2000):

The new law makes it illegal for any law enforcement agency to bill victims or victims insurance companies for the costs of examinations that take place to collect evidence of a sexual assault or determine if a sexual assault did occur.

We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence, Knowles said. Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.

While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests.

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past weve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just dont want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

Yes, we’re talking about that little money. But besides that, the police department didn’t charge other crime victims for evidence gathering and testing. Just those whose bodies happened to be part of the investigation.

I suppose one might appreciate the attempt to charge the insurance company instead of the victim — unless of course the victim didn’t HAVE health insurance. And even if the victim did, could you imagine adding working out the billing with your insurance company to the list of things you have to deal with after being raped? And what happened if the victim couldn’t come up with the money for the test?

This is mind-boggling on so many levels. Just one more question for Palin, who also doesn’t believe women who are victims of rape or incest should be allowed the choice of having an abortion …

Marxavi Angel Martínez is a 23-year-old library employee in North Carolina who has been arrested on charges of using a dead person’s Social Security Number. Martínez was brought to the United States legally at three years of age, but her parents overstayed their Visas. Martínez was then raised in the United States, becoming an honor student, cheerleader, library clerk, and now mother.

It’s this last item that appears to have sparked Martínez’s arrest, raising concerns about medical privacy and the potential to scare immigrants away from seeking care. Martínez, you see, received prenatal care at the Alamance County (NC) public health department. According to reports, “Alamance County Health Director Barry Bass said that during a recent State Bureau of Investigation inquiry into his health department, a judge ordered him to release the records of about five patients, one of whom was library worker Marxavi Angel Martínez.” Another source reports that “The sheriff has suggested that the librarian’s arrest was related to her care at the health department.”

Physicians and public health officials have responded to object to the chilling effect this may have on residents - legal citizens or otherwise - and their communities when seeking health care is discouraged because of fears of arrest and deportation. According to the Charlotte News & Observer, “several doctors…said that if patients become afraid to seek care, infectious diseases could spread, infant mortality could rise, and emergency costs could increase.”

Regarding privacy, one doctor interviewed for the piece explained:

“Whether you’re legal or illegal, it’s always been assumed that your medical information is private and can’t be used against you,” said Dr. Christopher Snyder III of Concord, president of the N.C. Academy of Family Physicians. “The doctor-patient relationship is sacred, and I’m not sure that has really been challenged until now. We’re in uncharted territory.”

NPR also has recent coverage of doctors’ concerns. We described another incident with similar potential effects in July, when an immigrant was stopped while driving home from a prenatal care visit in Nashville, TN. Although the officer had discretion as to whether to make an arrest, the very pregnant Juana Villegas was taken in and interrogated on her immigration status, ultimately being shackled to the bed during much of her labor and denied access a breast pump following the birth when she was returned to jail.

Related: Some librarians are also objecting to the arrest of Ms. Martínez. REFORMA, the National Association to Promote Library and Information Services to Latinos and the Spanish Speaking, has written a letter of protest, and addresses the use of another public service - the library:

“The manner in which she was arrested is deplorable; the place where this arrest took place is unthinkable: The Graham Public Library where she worked! The library—a traditionally safe space for the public—was transformed, in this instance, to a dangerous place where anyone can be arrested for their immigrant status.”

Thanks to local advocate Tim Chavez, the treatment of Juana Villegas DeLaPaz after she was stopped by a Berry Hill, TN police officer has become public. This incident began just a couple of streets away from my Nashville home, and has only been covered by one of our mainstream media outlets at last check.

According to Tim’s report, Juana Villegas DeLaPaz was pulled over by the Berry Hill police as she was leaving a prenatal clinic with her three children in tow. Although her car was registered and she had identification, she did not have a current driver’s license (which are no longer available to undocumented immigrants in Tennesse). The officer reportedly asked her to call someone to come and drive them all home, but then decided to arrest her. She was handcuffed and taken to jail.

In a follow-up post after speaking with DeLaPaz’s attorney, Chavez provided these additional details.

“Sgt. Coleman…made pregnant Juana wait in a hot car for an hour. When the other driver arrived, Coleman then told Juana that if she didn’t get out of the car into his police vehicle in two seconds he would put her in handcuffs. She told Coleman that she was supposed to deliver in three days, but it made no difference.”

Tim reports that during her U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) interview, it was determined that she had previously undergone deportation a decade prior, so she was kept in jail on the “driving without a license” charge and an ICE detainment. Then this happened:

“On 7/5/08, her water broke at approximately 10 p.m and she was taken by ambulance to General Hospital about an hour later. She gave birth on 7/6/08 at 1:03 a.m. She received excellent and compassionate care at Nashville General.”

“During her stay there, the guard (I believe it to have been sheriff’s personnel — wore a “green uniform”) disconnected the phone so that she could make no outgoing calls. She did not see her husband the entire time she was there. She was ankle-cuffed to the bed at all times (except when she was released to take a bathroom break).”

After giving birth, DeLaPaz had her ankles recuffed and had this to contend with:

“When the nurse requested the cuffs be removed to enable a better job of self-administering personal hygeine, the guard refused. The nurse became upset, but the guard callously said, ‘I’m just doing my job.’ She was discharged on 7/8 at 4 p.m. The nurse gave her a breast pump, but the sheriff’s guard refused to let her use it or take it with her from the hospital.”

Two days after giving birth, she was returned to jail. Having been initially jailed on July 3rd, DeLaPaz was released on July 10th.

Chavez has considerable discussion at Political Salsa of how the 287g program, which permits involvement of state and local law enforcement in immigration issues, has affected this case. As I mentioned in a post at Women’s Health News, this event sends a message to the community of immigrant women that there will be no discretion, no compassion, that they risk being jailed, giving birth in custody, and having their baby taken away if they take the simple step of leaving their homes to seek medical care while pregnant.

This was not a violent crime - this was simply driving without a valid driver’s license, mixed in with some anti-human sentiment. This woman presumably did not pose any immediate threat to society by being allowed to finish her pregnancy outside of a jail cell and spend precious time with her newborn. And yet, she was not allowed this, she was not respected as a human being. Neither was her infant.

Unfortunately, there are instances all over the country in which pregnant and/or immigrant women are treated inhumanely by those following procedures - when they are jailed instead of offered medical assistance for a drug addiction, when they miscarry and police tip lines get set up to rat them out (for something that isn’t illegal, as happened in West Virginia), when imprisoned women give birth with inadequate care and in shackles, when they try to get help for suspicious bleeding during pregnancy but are jailed and miscarry (as happened under police supervision in Florida). Please see the National Advocates for Pregnant Women and the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health for more discussion of related issues.

Related Posts:

• BREAKING NEWS … Outrage! Mother and newborn child separated and hurt by 287g in Nashville - Tim Chavez at Political Salsa
• Definitions of damnation by 287g in Nashville - Political Salsa
• More disturbing revelations emerge in case of arrested expectant mother then separated from newborn by 287g deportation program - Political Salsa
• Special Sunday Post: Nashville-area police department’s abuse of ICE’s 287(g) program calls for federal review - Latina Lista
• Funny How it Works - Tiny Cat Pants

Wide Disparities in Health Care by Race and Region: “Race and place of residence can have a staggering impact on the course and quality of the medical treatment a patient receives, according to new research showing that blacks with diabetes or vascular disease are nearly five times more likely than whites to have a leg amputated and that women in Mississippi are far less likely to have mammograms than those in Maine,” reports The New York Times.

The study was conducted by researchers at Dartmouth and was commissioned by the nation’s largest health-related philanthropy, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which announced a three-year, $300 million initiative intended to narrow health care disparities across lines of race and geography.

Repairing the Damage, Before Roe: “With the Supreme Court becoming more conservative, many people who support women’s right to choose an abortion fear that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that gave them that right, is in danger of being swept aside,” writes Waldo L. Fielding in this op-ed. “When such fears arise, we often hear about the pre-Roe ‘bad old days.’ Yet there are few physicians today who can relate to them from personal experience. I can.” Read on.

Legal Effects of Marriage for Same-Sex Couples: The San Francisco Chronicle has a comprehensive run-down of the legal and financial changes same-sex couples face if they get married in California.

Plus: What happens to the status of couples already married if the November initiative to ban same-sex marriage passes? Expect heavy litigation and a decision ultimately decided by the California Supreme Court, says UCLA law professor Brad Sears.

Paying for Health Care in Retirement - Good Luck: “I write about health care, and still the realization hit me like a ton of bricks today after I put down a just-released report from the Employee Benefit Research Institute. None of the presidential candidates have been talking about how to fix Medicare," writes Judith Graham at the Chicago Tribune.

Here’s the sobering EBRI report (PDF), effectively titled: “Savings Needed to Fund Health Insurance and Health Care Expenses in Retirement: Findings from a Simulation Model.”

On Becoming a Woman: In case you were looking for some, er, real-life advice, Blinky has excerpts from this 1950’s guide. Here’s analysis from Echidne, who calls it “a fascinating trip into the sexual politics of the past.”

“On the other hand,” she adds, “almost everything in those excerpts is advocated in this country somewhere, right this very moment. Abstinence is the responsibility of girls, for example. Women gentle and home-directed while men are strong and outer-directed? I was just told this by a liberal guy.”

Speaking of Abstinence: The National Abstinence Education Association has launched a $1 million campaign to recruit 1 million parents to “lobby local schools to adopt sex education programs focusing on abstinence and to work to elect local, state and national officials who support the approach,” reports the Washington Post.

The campaign comes as Congress is debating whether to authorize about $190 million in federal funding for such programs, which have come under increasing criticism because of a series of reports that concluded they are ineffective. Such criticism has prompted at least 17 states to refuse federal funding for such programs.

The group hopes to counter that trend, in part with a provocative video that asserts that comprehensive sex education encourages sexual activity by teenagers and a Web site that offers advice to parents about sex education.

Plus: Five days later, the same WaPo reporter, Rob Stein, wrote a page-one story about a new study by the Centers for Disease Control that found “a decade-long decline in sexual activity among high school students leveled off between 2001 and 2007, and that the rise in condom use by teens flattened out in 2003.”

The new figures renewed the heated debate about sex-education classes that focus on abstinence until marriage, which began receiving federal funding during the period covered by the latest survey and have come under increasing criticism that they are ineffective.

“Since we’ve started pushing abstinence, we have seen no change in the numbers on sexual activity,” said John Santelli, chairman of the department of population and family health at Columbia University. “The other piece of it is: Abstinence education spends a good amount of time bashing condoms. So it’s not surprising, if that’s the message young people are getting, that we’re seeing condom use start to decrease.”

Not surprisingly, proponents of abstinence-only programs blamed comprehensive sex-ed.

Hands Up if You’ve Experienced Street Harassment: The F-Word is gathering comments here, in response to comments here.

Breast Cancer News from ASCO Conference: Several breast cancer-related studies presented at the annual American Society of Clinical Oncology conference in Chicago are summarized here by Daily Women’s Health Policy Report. Meeting abstracts from the conference are available here.

Eat Locally, Think …: “The local food movement typically has been about improving the health of the planet,” writes Tara Parker-Pope. “But now researchers are trying to find out if eating locally farmed food is also better for your health. A team of researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has received a grant to study the public health impact of moving toward a local, sustainable food system.”

Chicago can’t hold a carrot stick to California when it comes to the availability of locally grown produce, but the farmers markets rock during the summer and fall. How ’bout where you live?

If I Could Be Anywhere Right Now: It would be here.

New York Governor Faces Suit Over Same-Sex Marriage Order: “An Arizona-based conservative Christian group said on Friday that it planned to sue Gov. David A. Paterson to block his directive to state agencies to recognize same-sex marriages performed outside New York,” reports The New York Times.

The group suing is the Alliance Defense Fund, which was founded by the Rev. James C. Dobson and others, all of whom are for limiting marriage to heterosexuals. The story also discusses how Senate Republican leaders plan on responding to the governor’s directive. Read our earlier post about plans in New York to recognize (but not yet allow) same-sex marriage.

The Rest of Us: In today’s Boston Globe Sunday Magazine, Rebecca Steinitz describes how mothers without an army of nannies and who have not “opted out” make it through summer vacation.

[I]t’s neither superwomen nor supermoms that I see when I drop my younger daughter off at school. While the first-graders zoom around us, I strategize about summer vacation with the preschool teacher and the nurse, the freelance film producer and the nutritionist who’s currently managing her husband’s plumbing business, the law professor and the stay-at-home moms — not to mention the dads. And, tales of mommy wars notwithstanding, we’re all talking to one another.

Do I live in some anomalous corner of working motherhood? I don’t think so. Despite frequent sightings of weekday-morning stroller-pushing moms and the much-ballyhooed dip of about a percentage point in the rate of women in the workforce between 2000 and 2004, statistics show that more than two-thirds of mothers work.

The story is chock-full of good statistics. Give it a read.

Do All Women Have the Right to Become Mothers?: “In many ways, access to and the affordability of infertility treatments speaks to our society’s view of who is considered worthy of motherhood,” writes Pamela Merritt at RH Reality Check.

Decades after eugenics was debunked and fell out of favor as a movement to “improve society,” the residue lingers: there is a strongly held belief that pregnancy and income should be connected. President Reagan tapped into that sentiment with his infamous comment about a “welfare queen,” but the core belief is as old as the American Dream: people who are poor are considered lazy, deserving of poverty and undeserving of anything it takes money to buy. Low-income women who are faced with infertility and seek treatment are suspected of trying to work the system and defraud society.

Plus: On Tuesday, June 3, RH Reality Check and Americans for UNFPA will host an online forum at 1 p.m. on global women’s health and the Republican and Democratic Party platforms. “Are the World’s Women Part of Our Political Agenda?” kicks off with a video statement from Anika Rahman, Americans for UNFPA president, and the insights of Democratic and Republican activists about their parties’ treatment of women’s issues. Rahmam will monitor the comments section through 4 p.m. to follow the discussion and respond to ideas on how to prioritize women’s health internationally.

Two Kinds of End-Of-Life Care: “There are two starkly different paths toward death in New York City’s hospitals, one for patients at elite private institutions, another for those at public hospitals, according to new data compiled as part of a consumer rating system,” reports The New York Times. Anemona Hartocollis and Ford Fessenden write:

Most elderly patients in their last two years of life have more intensive treatment, more tests, more days of hospitalization — and more out-of-pocket costs — at private teaching hospitals like N.Y.U. and Lenox Hill than their counterparts at Bellevue and the city’s other municipal hospitals, which have historically served the neediest New Yorkers. [...]

The rankings, compiled by Consumer Reports from a 15-year research project based at Dartmouth College, have huge implications for administrators, doctors and patients as they consider which model of care is best for those suffering from chronic, fatal illnesses like cancer, congestive heart failure, lung disease and dementia.

The study does not address the question of whether longer stays and more intervention prolong patients’ lives, and the Dartmouth researchers argue, in general, that less-aggressive treatment does not change.

Holy Smokes!: New York state on Tuesday will almost the double the tax on cigarettes — to $2.75 from $1.50, putting the price of a pack of cigarettes in New York City to around $8.50 (that also includes a $1.50 city tax).

From City Room: "It’s not clear whether the messages will have much effect on die-hard smokers, but social scientists have concluded that raising the cost of cigarettes has been a strong factor in bringing down the smoking rate. The city believes that cigarette-tax increases in 2002 helped bring about a 21 percent drop in adult smoking and a 52 percent drop in smoking among public high school students in the city."

Plus: World No Tobacco Day was May 31. Here’s more from the World Health Organization.

Did You Have an Abortion in Iowa?: If so, and if you experienced financial barriers at any point in the process, the Emma Goldman Clinic would like to hear about your experience. The information (which can be kept anonymous) will help the clinic in their work to provide assistance to women in similar situations.

Insight and Action: The website of the International Center for Research on Women is a terrific resource for background, research and advocacy information on issues such as HIV/AIDS, poverty reduction and violence against women.

The organization also features a special section on child marriage, which includes this photo exhibit as well as this six-minute video with images taken by award-winning photojournalist Stephanie Sinclair that depict the lives of girls in Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Nepal who marry as children.

Screening for Domestic Abuse: Erin Marcus, associate medical director of the Institute for Women’s Health at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, writes in The New York Times about the need for better methods to screen patients for domestic abuse.

"Those who support routine questioning say domestic violence is as or more common in women than many diseases for which doctors regularly check, including breast and colon cancer, and its health risks are well documented," notes Marcus. "Despite these recommendations, screening for domestic abuse in seemingly healthy women is nowhere near as widespread among doctors as testing for breast cancer or high cholesterol."

Who is the EPA Protecting Again?: Here's a story I meant to highlight earlier — an Environmental Protection Agency official told a Senate committee hearing in May that there’s "a distinct possibility" the EPA would not limit the amount of perchlorate, a toxic ingredient of solid rocket fuel, that is allowable in drinking water. Percholate is found in food crops, as well as human breast milk and baby formula. The L.A. Times has coverage of the EPA sitting on its hands:

State officials and water suppliers across the nation have been waiting for the EPA to set a standard for several years because perchlorate has contaminated the water supplies of at least 11 million people. Last
year, California, impatient with the EPA’s indecision, set its own standard.

Benjamin H. Grumbles, the EPA’s assistant administrator for water, said the EPA would decide by the end of the year whether to regulate perchlorate. Scientific studies have shown that the chemical blocks iodide and suppresses thyroid hormones, which are necessary for the normal brain development of a fetus or infant.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who chairs the committee, is understandably ticked:

"Congress will not sit idle while EPA fails to adequately protect our children. We must step in to require action that will ensure that our children and families can turn on their taps and be assured that what comes out is safe to drink," Boxer said.

Much of the water contamination comes from military bases and aerospace plants, as well as fireworks companies.

The Pentagon and its contractors for years have been lobbying against a federal standard, saying there are no proven health effects at levels to which people are exposed, and that cleaning up perchlorate could cost billions of dollars.

Much news to cover this week concerning same-sex marriage on opposite coasts. First up, wedding bells will ring for gay and lesbian couples in California starting June 17, the first day marriage licenses can be issued.

That day was decided upon by the state’s Office of Vital Records, in order to allow the state Supreme Court the maximum time to consider any challenge to its ruling before it takes effect, reports the San Francisco Chronicle.

The Office of Vital Records also announced how the new marriage forms will be worded — the forms refer to applicants simply as “Party A” and “Party B.”

And here’s more good news in California: The statewide Field Poll that has been conducted in that state for 30 years found, for the first time ever, a majority of voters support same-sex marriage. The majority was slim — only 51 percent — but it’s still a big step. Back in 1977, when the Field Poll first asked the question, only 28 percent favored same-sex marriage.

“This is a milestone in California,” Mark DiCamillo, the poll’s director, told the Chronicle. “You can’t downplay the importance of a change in an issue we’ve been tracking for 30 years.”

View the full poll (PDF), which breaks down responses by age, region, party, political ideology and religion.

New York, meanwhile, is poised to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. Gov. David A. Patterson acted on a directive issued by legal counsel May 14, which notified state agencies that gay couples married elsewhere “should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union.”

Jeremy W. Peters writes in The New York Times:

The directive cited a Feb. 1 ruling by a State Appellate Court in Rochester that Patricia Martinez, who works at Monroe Community College and who married her partner in Canada, could not be denied health benefits by the college because of New York’s longstanding policy of recognizing marriages performed elsewhere, even if they are not explicitly allowed under New York law. The appeals court said that New York must recognize marriages performed in other states that allow the practice and in countries that permit it, like Canada and Spain.

Monroe County filed an appeal with the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, but it was rejected on technical grounds. The county has not decided whether to file another appeal, a county spokesman said on Wednesday. The Court of Appeals has previously ruled that the state’s Constitution did not compel the recognition of same-sex marriages and that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether do so.

Groups that oppose gay marriage said the governor was essentially trying to circumvent the Legislature.

“It’s a perfect example of a governor overstepping his authority and sidestepping the democratic process,” said Brian Raum, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a national organization opposed to same-sex marriage. “It’s an issue of public policy that should be decided by the voters.”

Gay rights advocates, however, applauded Mr. Paterson, saying the broad directive would make it clear that gay couples wed in other states were entitled to all of the benefits of marriage in New York and relieve them of the burden of challenging or suing individual agencies.

The majority leader of the State Senate, Republican Joe Bruno, told the Times on Thursday “that he and his staff would look at whether the governor had violated the checks and balances that stand between the executive and the legislative branches. But he stopped short of saying that Mr. Paterson, a Democrat, had overstepped his authority. ‘There’s a constitutional question here,’ Mr. Bruno added.”

State agencies are going to have to revise “as many as 1,300 statutes and regulations in New York governing everything from joint filing of income tax returns to transferring fishing licenses between spouses,” according to the Times.

Some gay New Yorkers may be packing their bags for California next month — or Canada. While marriages performed in Massachusetts would be recognized in New York, Massachusetts doesn’t allow same-sex couples to marry there if their home state prohibits same-sex unions. For New Yorkers, that might just be a matter of time — if the Republican-controlled Senate quits stalling.

Advocates of same-sex marriage were quick to note the irony of New York’s position.

“If you’re going to treat us as equals, why don’t you just give us the marriage license?” said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of Empire State Pride Agenda. “So this is a temporary but necessary fix for a longer-term problem, which is marriage equality in New York State.”

Bush Ally Orr Leaves Just as Domestic Gag Rule Is Reconsidered: RH Reality Check has good coverage of the surprise resignation of Dr. Susan Orr, the assistant deputy secretary for population affairs. Orr previously worked for the Family Research Council — one of several conservative groups now pressuring President Bush to cut Title X family planning funding for clinics who also provide abortion services.

“Her most notable accomplishment in the year she has served is to defend the abstinence-until-marriage approach in the face of incontrovertible evidence it has failed,” writes Cristina Page. “Now that the Unplanned Family Research Council is within days of hitting another nail into Title X’s coffin, Dr. Orr suddenly and quietly resigns from her post so, one suspects, to not appear to have orchestrated the undermining of her own program from within.”

Read related posts by Amie Newman and Emily Douglas, and here’s more on the domestic gag rule by Marilyn Keefe of the National Partnership for Women & Families.

Plus: The Hill reports on how a group of centrist House Republicans are squaring off with GOP conservatives over modifying Title X regulations.

Domestic Partners Can Wed Without Dissolution: “Same-sex couples who are registered as domestic partners do not have to dissolve that union before getting married, attorneys that advise the state Legislature said Thursday, just as county clerks and other local officials met to determine how they will enact last week’s historic state Supreme Court ruling,” reports the San Francisco Chronicle.

Of course, there’s still the possibility of voters this November approving a constitutional amendment to limit marriage to opposite-sex couples. State Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco warned that in light of future uncertainty, couples should not dissolve their domestic partnerships until that question is settled.

“It would be foolhardy to dissolve because it would create a period of vulnerability” for couples, Migden said.

For answers to more questions on the legality and logistics of same-sex marriage in California, check out this special news section.

FDA Warns Mothers About Nipple Cream: The Food and Drug Administration issued a warning to nursing mothers on Friday not to use or purchase Mommy’s Bliss Nipple Cream, marketed by MOM Enterprises Inc. of San Rafael, Calif., The product label says there’s no need to remove the cream before nursing, but it contains ingredients that may cause respiratory distress, vomiting and diarrhea in infants. Whoa.

The potentially harmful ingredients in the cream are chlorphenesin and phenoxyethanol. From the FDA release:

“Chlorphenesin relaxes skeletal muscle and can depress the central nervous system and cause respiratory depression (slow or shallow breathing) in infants. Phenoxyethanol is a preservative that is primarily used in cosmetics and medications. It also can depress the central nervous system and may cause vomiting and diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration in infants.”

“FDA is particularly concerned that nursing infants are being unwittingly exposed by their mothers to this product with dangerous side effects,” said Janet Woodcock, director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “Additionally, these two ingredients may interact with one another to further compound and increase the risk of respiratory depression in nursing infants.”

The FDA said it has not received any reports of injury to infants. The company has stopped selling the cream.

Chemicals in Nail Salons Affect Workers: A new survey from the Northern California Cancer Center and Asian Health Services of Oakland has found that Vietnamese nail salon workers suffer from acute health effects associated with the chemicals they use in that work, according to this release. Toxic and potentially hazardous ingredients, including solvents, plasticizers, resins and acids, are commonly found in nail care products.

“A majority of the workers reported health concerns from exposures to workplace chemicals,” reports Dung Nguyen of Asian Health Services who directed the face-to-face interviews with 201 Vietnamese nail salon workers at 74 salons. “Many of them reported having some health problem after they began working in the industry, particularly skin and eye irritation, breathing difficulties and headaches.” said Nguyen.

“Our findings highlight a critical need for further investigation into the breast cancer risk of nail salon workers, underscored by the workers’ routine use of carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals, their prevalent health concerns about such chemicals, and their high level of acute health problems,” adds Thu Quach, MPH, of the Northern California Cancer Center.

The study was published online and is scheduled to appear in the October issue of Journal of Community Health.

New Safety Program to Monitor Medicare Drug Use: “Federal health officials will begin monitoring prescription drug usage by millions of Medicare participants in an effort to identify potential safety problems,” reports the Associated Press. Kevin Freking writes:

The Food and Drug Administration has been under increasing pressure to develop a comprehensive drug surveillance system since the painkiller Vioxx was pulled from the market in 2004 after it was linked to increased risk of stroke and heart attack.

New regulations announced Thursday by the Health and Human Services Department will enable the FDA, states and academic researchers to screen the Medicare claims data. Under the regulation, the Medicare data can be made available in 30 days.

My favorite quote from the story: “The era of wait and see is going to become the era of tell me right now,” the FDA commissioner, Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach, said.

At first glance it sounds great. But then you read that only general details about the cost of enacting this new “Sentinel Initiative” were provided and, as Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said, it’s still in the planing states. Our verdict: We’ll wait and see.

Legal Rights of the Uninsured: The Chicago Tribune blog Triage, written by Judith Graham, covers issues related to the health-care industry. Here’s an interesting post on the legal rights of the uninsured — which in Illinois refers to 1.75 million people, almost 60 percent of whom are employed. For starters:

There is no such thing as a “right to care” for people who don’t have health insurance, with one major exception.

If you’re experiencing a medical emergency, you can go to any hospitals and get treatment. Hospitals are enjoined from turning you away under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal act passed by Congress in 1986.

Plus: For up-to-date statistics and analysis of health care coverage and the uninsured, visit this section of the Kaiser Family Foundation. And check out the new Kaiser Fast Facts.

My Veggie Hero: Meet Johanna McCloy, who is taking on one ballpark at a time, trying to get vegetarian hot dogs added to the menu so all baseball fans can experience the joy of filling a bun with sauerkraut and mustard (ketchup? yeah, right). Check out her site, SoyHappy.org. And go Cubs!

From the Washington Post:

A federal appeals court has ruled that Virginia’s ban on late-term abortions, which was approved by the General Assembly in 2003 over objections from then governor Mark R. Warner (D), is unconstitutional.

In a ruling issued this afternoon, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said the procedures covered under Virginia’s ban “imposes an undue burden on a woman’s right to obtain an abortion.”

The ruling will likely reignite the abortion debate in Virginia.

The decision was 2-1. According to the Associated Press, “The appeals court cited a key difference between the federal and state bans on a procedure that abortion opponents call ‘partial-birth abortion.’ The federal law protects doctors who set out to perform a legal abortion that by accident becomes the banned procedure. The Virginia law provides no such protection.”

“The Virginia Act thus imposes criminal liability on a doctor who sets out to perform a standard D&E that by accident becomes an intact D&E, thereby exposing all doctors who perform standard D&Es to prosecution, conviction, and imprisonment,” the majority wrote.

Read the full opinion (PDF).

Plus: Here are some state facts about abortion in Virginia, from the Guttmacher Institute.

When Chick Flicks Get Knocked Up: “Eventually, your female friends — the ones who married late and retained youthful obsessions with Yo La Tengo and graphic art books until forty — may shock you by having children,” writes Alissa Quart at Mother Jones. “This year, at least, they have cinematic alter egos; those millennium Mary Tyler Moores Sarah Jessica Parker and Helen Hunt have left their cosmos and canned laughter behind and gotten knocked up onscreen too. In the process, they have created a new genre: The Fertility Film. But are the new fertility film stars actually feminists?” (via Feministing)

Silicone Gel Implants May Lose Approval: From our enlightened neighbor to the north … “Health Canada may have to reverse its controversial 2006 decision to allow women to get silicone gel-filled breast implants if it proceeds with a plan to declare key chemicals found in them to be toxic, experts say,” reports The Ottawa Citizen. (via Beauty and the Breast)

South Carolina Supreme Court Overturns Conviction: “A South Carolina woman convicted of homicide by child abuse after her stillborn baby tested positive for cocaine should get a new trial because of several mistakes her attorneys made, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday,” reports the Associated Press. “Attorneys for Regina McKnight did not introduce the baby’s autopsy report into evidence and failed to rebut the prosecution’s medical expert, the court said in the unanimous decision.”

Prosecutors have 15 days to decide whether to appeal. From the Myrtle Beach Online:

Attorneys for the National Advocates for Pregnant Women and the S.C. Civil Liberties Union became involved in McKnight’s case when she asked for post-conviction relief.

“The groups got involved because there is complete consensus that prosecuting pregnant women is bad for mothers and babies,” said Lynn Paltrow, with the National Advocates for Pregnant Women. “Regina McKnight was convicted on junk science and was not fairly represented at trial.”

A Place to Pump: “Washington area women have hooked up electric or manual versions in parked cars, restrooms, a telephone booth and the basement storage room of the National Zoo visitors center, where a box of panda costumes doubled this spring as a table on which one woman set her pump, bottles and other equipment,” writes Rebecca Adams at the Washington Post.

“Not perhaps what the D.C. Council had in mind when it passed a law in December requiring employers to provide female workers a private, clean space, outside a restroom, to express milk. The Child’s Right to Nurse Act also gives a woman the right to breast-feed, covered or not, in any place, public or private, where she has a right to be.”

Maternal Exposure to Persistent Organic Pollutants Linked to Urologic Conditions in Boys: This release from the American Urological Association summarizes studies that confirm existing hypotheses that maternal exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals – including total polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs, such as Arochlor) and organochlorinated pesticides (such as dichlorodiphenyl-trichloroethane, or DDT) may contribute to an increased incidences of congenital anomalies.

Mammograms Coupled with Ultrasounds: Deborah Katz of U.S. News & World Report looks at new research on combining mammography and ultrasounds, which may be better for finding cancers in some women, but it also greatly increases the rate of false-positive results. Plus: Check out our analysis on routine mammograms for premenopausal women.

The Business of Bacteria: The L.A. Times reports on the popularity of probioitics, live "friendly" bacteria that is showing up in more foods, like Dannon’s Activia yogurt. “Companies claim that the daily consumption of probiotics can provide consumers with benefits such as a boost to the immune system and relief from intestinal distress — and researchers think that certain probiotic strains hold promise in a number of areas,” writes Brendan Borrell. “But how significant these benefits are is a matter of debate. And it can be tough to decipher which products offer verifiable health claims and which are piggybacking on the hype of the booming industry.

Doctors Start to Say “I’m Sorry” Long Before “See You in Court”: The New York Times reports on a change in hospital policy: full disclosure when a doctor makes a mistake. Kevin Sack writes:

For decades, malpractice lawyers and insurers have counseled doctors and hospitals to “deny and defend.” Many still warn clients that any admission of fault, or even expression of regret, is likely to invite litigation and imperil careers.

But with providers choking on malpractice costs and consumers demanding action against medical errors, a handful of prominent academic medical centers, like Johns Hopkins and Stanford, are trying a disarming approach.

By promptly disclosing medical errors and offering earnest apologies and fair compensation, they hope to restore integrity to dealings with patients, make it easier to learn from mistakes and dilute anger that often fuels lawsuits.

Malpractice lawyers say that what often transforms a reasonable patient into an indignant plaintiff is less an error than its concealment, and the victim’s concern that it will happen again.

Culture Affects How Teen Girls See Harassment: “Teenage girls of all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds still experience sexism and sexual harassment – but cultural factors may control whether they perceive sexism as an environmental problem or as evidence of their own shortcomings,” according to this release from the University of Kentucky summarizing a study of 600 girls, ages 12 to 18, in California and Georgia.

Ninety percent of the girls reported experiencing at least one incident of sexual harassment, the researchers from University of Kentucky and University of California Santa Cruz found.

Specifically, 67 percent of girls reported receiving unwanted romantic attention, 62 percent were exposed to demeaning gender-related comments, 58 percent were teased because of their appearance, 52 percent received unwanted physical contact and 25 percent were bullied or threatened with harm by a male. 52 percent of girls also reported receiving discouraging gender-based comments on the math, science and computer abilities, usually from male peers, and 76 percent of girls reported sexist comments on their athletic abilities, again
predominantly from male peers.

The researchers found that girls have different levels of understanding of sexism and sexual harassment, which may affect reporting data. Older girls and those from a lower socioeconomic background reported more sexism than did their peers. Latin and Asian American girls reported less sexual harassment than did girls of other ethnic groups. Girls who had been exposed to feminist ideas, either through the media or an adult such as a mother or teacher, were more likely to identify and report sexist behavior than were girls who had no information about feminism. Girls who reported feeling pressure from their parents to conform to gender stereotypes were also more likely to perceive sexism. Girls who felt atypical for their gender and/or were unhappy with stereotypical gender roles were most likely to report sexism and harassment.

The study appears in the May/June issue of Child Development.

The California Supreme Court has overturned the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, by a vote of 4-3.

From The New York Times:

The court’s 4-to-3 decision striking down state laws that had limited marriages to unions between a man and a woman makes California only the second state, after Massachusetts, to allow same-sex marriages. The decision, which becomes effective in 30 days, is certain to play a role in the presidential campaign.

“In view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship,” Chief Justice Ronald M. George wrote of marriage for the majority, “the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples.”

Of course, it’s not all smooth sailing from here, as the L.A. Times notes:

The state high court’s 4-3 ruling was unlikely to end the debate over gay matrimony in California. A group has circulated petitions for a November ballot initiative that would amend the state Constitution to block same-sex marriage, while the Legislature has twice passed bills to authorize gay marriage. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed both.

Here’s a PDF of the court ruling and