Blogs Comment On HHS Rule, Palin, Rape Exceptions

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Abortion
Article Date: 08 Oct 2008 - 11:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   view / write opinions   rate article

~ "FRC Submits Comments to HHS on Conscience Protection," Family Research Council Blog: In a blog entry, the Family Research Council released comments it submitted to HHS on the proposed federal regulation that would allow health care providers who receive federal grants to opt out of care they object to based on moral or religious grounds. The entry includes a summary of FRC's comments, which states that the "reasonable, subjective religious or moral conviction of the individual or institutional health care provider should govern" and that "recognizing a right of conscience does not discriminate against women or violate concepts mandated in Roe v. Wade." The organization also calls on HHS to adopt a "fertilization-based definition of pregnancy" and "reject the implantation-based definition in HHS's human-subject regulations" (Family Research Council Blog, 10/4).

~ "Where is Palin on Women's Health Issues?" Deborah Kotz, On Women, U.S. News and World Report: Kotz writes that during the vice presidential debate last week, she "kept waiting for this question that never came," which is if the Republican ticket of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would "make efforts to limit a women's access to abortion and emergency contraception." Kotz says that the public already has heard from Palin about her views on abortion and emergency contraception, but she wants to "know more about any plans to implement these personal views." Kotz writes that she is "still uncertain" whether Palin believes abortion should be illegal or not, even after Katie Couric of CBS News interviewed the candidate. Kotz adds, "where does [Palin] stand on the proposed government rule that could limit your access to contraception and infertility services? ... She says she believes there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution, a right that was first upheld when the Supreme Court ruled in 1965 that states couldn't ban contraceptives. ... But, I'm not sure how her libertarian views jibe with her abhorrence of anything -- be it [intrauterine devices] or [EC] -- that would cause the destruction of a fertilized egg" (Kotz, "On Women," U.S. News and World Report, 10/3).

~ "On Those Supposed Rape Exceptions," Feministe: A Feministe blog entry says that the rape exceptions included in Initiated Measure 11, the proposed abortion ban in South Dakota, are not only "absolutely cruel to women," but they "attempt to reframe revoking a woman's choice to not report her rape as also empowering to her." The entry says that rape exception "shift[s] the burden of reporting from the victim to the doctor" and does not "eas[e]" the burden on the survivor because she still would have to file a police report. The "overall chances of re-traumatizing a victim are hugely increased when the state requires her to unwillingly undergo the process of reporting her rape in order to gain the privilege of aborting her rapist's fetus," the entry says. In addition, the argument made by some supporters of the initiative that rapists use abortion to cover their crimes suggests that the survivors "themselves are seeking out the abortions and thereby covering up their own rapes," which is a "repulsive way to frame such a situation," according to the blog (Feministe, 10/7).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.