Blogs Comment On Omnibus Spending Bill, Abstinence-Only Funding, Other Topics

Main Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Included In: Sexual Health / STDs;  Abortion;  Cervical Cancer / HPV Vaccine
Article Date: 16 Dec 2009 - 3:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

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

~ "Refusing To Provide Contraception to Women: Whose 'Right' Is it Anyway?," Amie Newman, RH Reality Check: Newman writes that while she was recently commenting on the Midwife Connection blog, she engaged in a debate with a reader who believes that pharmacists should have a right refuse to fill emergency contraception prescriptions on the grounds that the drugs are tantamount to abortion and murder. Newman explains that EC is not an abortion method and that "[y]ou cannot get any sort of medication from a pharmacist that causes an abortion." She goes on to write that "all major medical organizations, most physicians and women who take birth control" agree that contraception is not murder. She also notes that 98% of women use contraception at some point in their lives. According to Newman, pharmacists who deny contraception prescriptions go against the position of the World Health Organization and many other groups that "contraception is critical to saving women's lives, raising the status of girls around the world, improving newborn health [and] improving the health and well-being of entire nations." She continues, "If a pharmacist believes that legal birth control is immoral and cannot perform part of his or her duties because of this belief system, the pharmacy should then either always have another pharmacist on duty who believes otherwise, or the pharmacist in question should open his or her own business, and state clearly that they refuse to service the women of their community who need or want birth control" (Newman, RH Reality Check, 12/11).

~ "House of Representatives Removes D.C. Abortion Funding Ban, Rejects Ban on Funding for Needle Exchange," Jodi Jacobson, RH Reality Check: The House on Thursday voted to remove a ban that prohibits Washington, D.C., from using local tax money to help low-income women pay for abortion services, marking a "major victory for public health" and the district's right to control its own budget, Jacobson writes. The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington criticized the decision, claiming that the district's abortion rate is greater than 40% of all pregnancies and that the funding would encourage women to have abortions. "City health department statistics, however, show that roughly 25% of all reported pregnancies in 2005 ended in abortion, and that figure fell to 15% in 2007," Jacobson writes (Jacobson, RH Reality Check, 12/11).

~ "Is There a 'Morning-After Pill' for ObamaCare?" Allysa Finley, Wall Street Journal's "Political Diary": "In a gambit that has confounded both liberal and conservative groups," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) "is using the [Senate's] health care bill to restore funding for abstinence-only sex education programs that liberals (such as Mr. Reid himself) have spent the past three years trying to zero out," Finley writes. Marcela Howell, a spokesperson for Advocates for Youth, said, "If Republicans aren't going to vote for this bill, I can't see why it should include their provision." Funding for abstinence programs was directed through block grants to states during the administration of President George W. Bush, but President Obama has opposed the programs. Reid said he added the provision to the Senate bill to make it as similar as possible to the Senate Finance Committee's version of the legislation (S 1796). Finley notes that Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) joined 10 Republicans in supporting the amendment to the Finance Committee bill. "Reid hopes that by giving her $50 million in abstinence education to talk about back home, Ms. Lincoln will vote for a trillion-dollar government health takeover," Finley claims (Finley, "Political Diary," Wall Street Journal, 12/14).

~ "Eliminating HPV Vaccine Mandate for Immigrant Women: A Victory on the Road to Reproductive Justice," Miriam Yeung and Amanda Allen, RH Reality Check: Yeung and Allen, both of the National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum, praise the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recent decision -- which took effect Monday -- to lift a requirement that all young immigrant women receive human papillomavirus vaccines before applying for a green card or citizenship. They write that the move is a "reversal of a harmful and discriminatory rule" that stripped women of their ability to make informed choices. The fight against the rule was led by NAPAWF, the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health and the National Coalition of Immigrant Women's Rights, among others. Yeung and Allen say the rule was unfair for several reasons, among them that immigrant women were not allowed to weigh the vaccine's pros and cons. They also cite the cost of the vaccine, which is at least $360 for a full round. "The HPV vaccine mandate created an untenable additional financial and administrative barrier to the immigration application process," Yeung and Allen write, noting that immigrant women "are disproportionately un- or underinsured." Furthermore, HPV "does not pose an immediate threat to public health," like other CDC-mandated vaccines for immigrants, they write. Many groups also noted that the "mandatory use of a medical procedure on a targeted population when it is not required of the general population is discriminatory," according to Yeung and Allen. The debate over the vaccine mandate also "illustrates the need for health care reform that meets the needs of poor women, immigrant women and women of color," Yeung and Allen continue. "The current health care reform debate ignores the needs of immigrant women at best, and penalizes them at worst, by prohibiting them from accessing affordable health care in the exchange," they write, adding, "Moreover, political debates suggesting that immigration reform should happen after health reform imply that immigrants do not need health care and that identities can be precisely and tidily segregated" (Yeung/Allen, RH Reality Check, 12/14).

~ "Obama Can Help the World's Women," Rahim Kanani, Huffington Post blogs: In light of his acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize on Dec. 10, President Obama "must spearhead a bold and unprecedented initiative" aimed at addressing global violence against women and girls, "a cancer that has incessantly killed lives and livelihoods around the world," according to Kanani, a research associate at Harvard University's Hauser Center for Nonprofit Organizations. "Whether forced marriage, rape as a weapon of war, human trafficking, female genital mutilation or intimate partner violence, this epidemic affects all corners of the Earth," he writes, adding, "For decades, in the name of stability, the United States has turned a blind eye and placed strategic diplomatic ties with repressive regimes over the human cost of these relations." The "plight of women and girls is intimately tied to stability," and Obama "has both the evidence and momentum to enact sweeping reforms to the way in which America conducts its business abroad," Kanani says. Obama "must proactively engage" in the United Nations' Trust Fund To End Violence Against Women, which awarded nearly $19 million in 2008 for initiatives in developing countries, though it received $525 million worth of grant requests, Kanani continues. By investing in the Trust Fund, Obama "will rebuild trust and goodwill with the [U.N.], contribute to the national security priorities of the United States, and demonstrate America's moral leadership towards ending a defining human rights struggle of our time," he writes (Kanani, Huffington Post blogs, 12/11).

~ "Conservative Lawmakers Will Join 'Prayercast' Against Health Bill," Michael O'Brien, The Hill's "Blog Briefing Room": Republican Sens. Sam Brownback (Kan.) and Jim DeMint (S.C.) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) will join a group of pastors and religious leaders on Wednesday for a 'prayercast' organized by the Family Research Council's action group, O'Brien writes. The prayer service will be broadcast online and will address "the threats to the God-given right to human life through government funding of abortions, our health from rationing, our family finances from higher taxes and our general freedom posed by the government plan to take over health care," according to FRC Action. The group's description of the event says, "We will enter into a time of prayer for the nation and our leaders. Your engagement and prayer is more critical than ever as Congress will very soon vote on a final health care bill" (O'Brien, "Blog Briefing Room," The Hill, 12/14).

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.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

• Additional
• References
• Citations