Blogs Comment On Provider 'Conscience' Rule, HHS Secretary Nomination, Reducing Abortions

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Sexual Health / STDs;  Abortion;  Primary Care / General Practice
Article Date: 22 Dec 2008 - 3:00 PDT

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

The following summarizes select women's health-related blog entries.

~ "New Government Rule Could Limit Your Access to Birth Control," Deborah Kotz, U.S. News and World Report blog: HHS passed its "conscience" rule "just under the wire," Kotz writes, adding that "if it had been filed after Dec. 20, President-elect [Barack] Obama simply could have canceled it with a stroke of his pen, which he has promised to do." One of the concerns raised by opponents of the rule -- which allows health care professionals who receive federal grants to refuse to provide medical information and services they object to based on their moral or religious beliefs -- "was whether patients would even be informed of their doctor's refusal to administer certain procedures or if they would simply be kept in the dark about their options," Kotz writes, adding that there is "no regulation forcing doctors to be fully transparent with patients -- as there is forcing hospitals and clinics to hire docs without regard to the services they're willing to perform" (Kotz, U.S. News and World Report blog, 12/18).

~ "HHS Provider Conscience Rule: You Better Shop Around," Marilyn Keefe, RH Reality Check: The Bush administration "put in place the final piece of its shameful women's health care legacy by finalizing" the HHS "conscience" rule, which allows health care professionals who receive federal grants to refuse to provide medical information and services they object to based on their moral or religious beliefs, Keefe of the National Partnership for Women and Families writes, adding that the rule "could dramatically undermine information and access to reproductive health care services." According to Keefe, the rule "upend[s] the notion of informed consent" and "will create confusion in crucial situations where the health and well-being of patients should be the top priority." Keefe calls on Americans to contact the incoming Congress and Obama administration and "urge them to say 'no' to these dangerous regulations" and request President-elect Obama "suspend the enforcement of the rule and then issue a routine request for comments on rescinding the rule permanently." Keefe concludes, "'You better shop around' may work for finding bargains in this holiday season, but it's an onerous and unacceptable burden to put on low-income women seeking the reproductive health care they need" (Keefe, RH Reality Check, 12/18).

~ "The Truth About Abortion Reduction," Sarah Posner, American Prospect blog: "A coalition of evangelicals and Catholics who believe they pushed the Democratic Party to adopt the language of 'abortion reduction' is gearing up for 2009, preparing to hold Democrats' feet to the fire," Posner -- author of "God's Profits: Faith, Fraud and the Republican Crusade for Values Voters" -- writes in a blog entry. According to Posner, because evangelicals and Catholics voted for Obama in higher numbers than they did for John Kerry, many of these religious leaders "are threatening that Democratic politicians will lose support if they don't deliver on abortion-reduction legislation." Posner writes that "[a]lthough this evangelical-Catholic coalition claims to represent 'common ground,' its position is not the uniform one among religious leaders and holds less sway" with President-elect Barack Obama's incoming administration "than the coalition claimed during the presidential campaign." According to Posner, Obama has been consistent in advocating for policies aimed at reducing unintended pregnancies and protecting reproductive choice. As a Senator, Obama sponsored "Prevention First," legislation to increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education. In contrast, many religious "abortion-reduction" advocates "support incentives that they argue will encourage women not to choose abortion, such as economic supports for pregnant women and adoption promotion," she adds. Posner writes that the "prospects for passing any reproductive health bills in the 111th Congress remain uncertain," particularly as some legislators disagree about whether to include contraceptive provisions in proposed bills. She concludes that reaching "common ground" on abortion is "a worthy goal, but the abortion-reduction coalition's claim to define it is itself an impediment to cooperation with the dominant pro-choice elements of Obama's coalition" (Posner, American Prospect blog, 12/16).

~ "Travesty of the Week: Catholic Health Association Applauds Daschle Nomination," Judie Brown, American Life League blog: If the Senate approves President-elect Barack Obama's nomination of former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) as HHS secretary, "America will have an avowed Catholic pro-abort at the helm of one of the most crucial departments in the entire federal government," Brown writes. According to Brown, although a Catholic bishop once sent a letter to Daschle instructing him not to call himself Catholic because of his stance on abortion, "this history of Daschle's fall from grace has apparently fallen on some extremely deaf ears in the Catholic community." Brown writes that a statement issued by Carol Keehan, president and CEO of the Catholic Health Association -- which praises Daschle as an "extraordinary and capable" leader who has an "enormous understanding of health care delivery issues" -- is "an outrage and a scandal." Brown concludes that being Catholic "still means upholding truth, not groveling at the feet of one of the most rabid pro-abortion politicians ever to sit in the United States Senate, and, God forbid, soon to be" HHS secretary (Brown, American Life League blog, 12/18).

~ "Unconscionable Policies, Dangerous Politics," Jodi Jacobson, Huffington Post blogs: The HHS "conscience" rule published Thursday "could deeply undermine long-established principles of medical ethics and responsibility by, for example, allowing providers to conflate widely used contraceptive devices, such as birth control pills and intra-uterine devices, with abortion," Jacobson writes. Jacobson also discusses the Global AIDS Act, which includes a "conscience clause" allowing organizations to opt out of providing HIV prevention, treatment and care to those whose "lifestyles" or life choices they oppose. Jacobson writes that the two regulations "have more in common than simply the semantics of the terms 'conscience' or 'refusal clause.'" She continues that both measures "are part of an ongoing, insidious and unfortunately increasingly successful effort to privilege one form of religious 'morality' and belief above all others" by "redefining all forms of contraceptive technology as 'abortion,' stigmatizing reproductive and sexual health services of all kinds, marginalizing persons whose sexual identities or livelihoods are deemed 'offensive' according to one set of 'morals,' breaking the social contract between provider and patient, and flouting basic principles of medicine and public health by citing 'conscience' as justification for denying medical care." According to Jacobson, the "consequences" of these regulations "are immediate, and the harms directly proportional to the level of economic and social disparity that limits access by individuals to the care they want and need." Although the Obama administration will have "ample opportunities" to reverse these "onerous" rules, "to declare success and stop there will be to win the battle and lose the war," Jacobson writes. She concludes, "Those who believe in balancing providers' rights with patients needs and rights must be forceful and proactive in putting the door back on its hinges, and that will ... require proactive conversation and mobilization, starting now" (Jacobson, Huffington Post blogs, 12/18).

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.