Speaking in Angola during a weeklong tour of Africa, Pope Benedict XVI on Friday condemned sexual violence against women and criticized moves by some African countries to legalize some abortions, the AP/Google reports. In a speech in Luanda, Angola, Benedict said, "Particularly disturbing is the crushing yoke of discrimination that women and girls so often endure, not to mention the unspeakable practice of sexual violence and exploitation, which causes such humiliation and trauma." He also condemned the "irony of those who promote abortion as a form of 'maternal' health care," adding, "How disconcerting the claim that the termination of life is a matter of reproductive health." According to the AP/Google, the pope's comments referred to an African Union agreement signed by Angola and 44 other countries stating that abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest or when the woman's life is in danger. Angola, a former Portuguese colony, is predominantly Catholic, with about 8.6 million residents, more than 60% of the population, who are members of the faith. Traditionally, Angolans have had large families, but in recent years many have cited the country's high cost of living as a reason for wanting to curtail family growth, according to the AP/Google (Simpson, AP/Google, 3/20).
Vatican Official Speaks Out Against Excommunication Over Abortion for Brazilian Girl
In related news, Archbishop Rino Fisichella, the top bioethics official for the Vatican, said that excommunication was unwarranted in the case of two Brazilian doctors who performed an abortion on a nine-year-old girl who was allegedly raped by her stepfather, the Religion News Service/Washington Post reports. Fisichella's statement on the abortion case was the lead article in a recent issue of the official Vatican newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano. The abortion case stirred controversy when the local archbishop, Josa Cardoso Sobrinho, excommunicated the doctors and the mother of the girl for allowing the abortion, which was performed when the girl was about 15 weeks pregnant. The doctors said carrying the pregnancy to term would have been life-threatening for the girl, who weighed 80 pounds. Fisichella, who did not address the excommunication of the girl's mother, said that although abortion is an "intrinsically wicked act," it might have been the lesser evil under the circumstances. He stressed that a degree of moral discretion is required for doctors, a position that is in contrast to the church's usual stance on abortion, the Religion News Service/Post reports. "The life was in serious danger because of the pregnancy in progress," he wrote, adding, "How to act in these cases? An arduous decision for the physician and for the moral law itself."
According to the Religion News Service/Post, Fisichella's article included a "frank rebuke" of Archbishop Sobrinho, accusing the archbishop of rushing to declare excommunication. Fisichella wrote that Sobrinho's action affected the "credibility" of the church's teaching, adding that now the church "appears in the eyes of so many as insensitive, incomprehensible and lacking in mercy." The Religion News Service/Post reports that Vatican journalist Sandro Magister said it is likely that Fisichella's statement was approved by Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, who as secretary of state is considered to be the Vatican's second highest official after the Pope. Fisichella's statement contradicts Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, head of the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops, who publicly defended the action of Archbishop Sobrinho (Rocca, Religion News Service/Washington Post, 3/21).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
суббота, 24 марта 2012 г.
суббота, 17 марта 2012 г.
Blogs Comment On Levi Johnston, Obama's Budget Proposal, Other Topics
The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.
~ "Why We Need Bristol (And Levi)," Cristina Page, Birth Control Watch: Bristol Palin and the Candie's Foundation's "shared message to teens is: you don't want to become a teen parent," something that "traditional pregnancy prevention messages have often missed" because they "assumed that teens don't need convincing on that issue," Page writes. The Candie's Foundation recently made Palin, the daughter of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), an ambassador to promote teen pregnancy prevention. However, "there is one thing very important missing from the Candie's campaign," Page says. The national conversation on teen pregnancy "desperately needs" the involvement of teenage boys like Levi Johnston, the father of Palin's four-month-old son, Page writes. Johnston "brings with him a great chance to make boys the stakeholders they inevitably are" and "offers a unique perspective on the difficulties of being a teen father, one that will resonate with boys in a way [Palin's] point of view will not," she continues. In making Palin a teen pregnancy prevention ambassador, the Candie's Foundation is "taking a big risk," and it "would extend that risk further by giving [Johnston] an equal voice in the discussion," Page writes. She continues, "But with big risk comes the possibility for great gains, too." Palin and Johnston are "bravely offering their intensely personal misstep up for others to learn from. The may be at odds with each other, ... but they are united in their message about the not-so-glamorous life of teen parents," she says (Page, Birth Control Watch, 5/8).
~ "The Next Justice: What Obama Wants," Geoffrey Stone, Huffington Post blogs: Four factors "will be especially important" to President Obama when he is deciding on his Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice David Souter, according to Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago. Stone says that the factors include: high intellectual ability; moderately liberal stances on issues; a "strong voice" on the role of the Supreme Court; and the ability to "[b]uild a consensus within the Court." The "essence," for Obama, of the terms "moderate liberal" and "conservative" is "his continuing reference to 'empathy,'" Stone writes. He continues that Obama "wants to appoint a justice who understands that a unique role in our system of government is to be especially attentive to the interests of the unrepresented, the oppressed, political and religious dissenters, those accused of crime and minorities who have traditionally lost out in the political process." The U.S. and the Supreme Court "badly need a justice who can articulate a progressive view of constitutional interpretation, both to counter the conservatives on the Court and to change the terms of the national debate," he writes. Obama will also "want to appoint a justice who adds a measure of diversity of experience and perspective within the court," such as a woman or racial minority, Stone concludes (Stone, Huffington Post blogs, 5/11).
~ Blog Posts Examine Sex Education, Other Provisions in Obama's Budget Proposal, Jodi Jacobson/Sharon Camp/AmplifyYourVoice: Obama's fiscal 2010 budget proposal that was released last week "puts us on the road to evidence-based public health policy," Jacobson writes in a RH Reality Check blog entry. However, it "does not, unfortunately, really advance the journey towards comprehensive sex education, and is therefore a missed opportunity," she writes (Jacobson, RH Reality Check, 5/9). Camp writes in a Huffington Post blog entry that although the "most welcome development" of the budget proposal is "the abolition of 'abstinence-only-until-marriage' programs," it is important to remember that the proposal "is just a starting point" and that "Congress gets a crack at whether to accept, reject or modify the president's recommendations." Camp in the blog post assesses several areas of the budget related to women's health, including sex education, access to abortion, family planning and global health issues, among others (Camp, Huffington Post blogs, 5/8). AmplifyYourVoice writes in a Daily Kos blog entry that the Obama proposal "struck a blow to the abstinence-only community" but that "these people are not giving up." The blog post continues, "And considering that our fight to end funding for abstinence-only programs is long from over, considering that Congress must pass this budget without sneaking funding for ab-only back in, neither should we." The blog post includes links to videos of comments from abstinence-only supporters (AmplifyYourVoice, Daily Kos, 5/8).
~ "For the Culture War, a Hail Mary," Chris Korzen, Huffington Post blogs: Attempts by "culture warriors" on the right to "sabotage" President Obama's plan to give the commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame later this month "is ostensibly an effort to reassert the Church's position on abortion," Korzen writes. "In reality, the Notre Dame 'scandal' is little more than a manufactured controversy, and a predictable product of the Republican coalition's current sorry state of affairs," he continues. Korzen writes that Obama's "genuine commitment to prevention has ruffled the feathers of absolutists on both sides of the aisle. But for abortion 'grays' -- those Americans who remain conflicted about abortion, many of them moderate swing voters -- the president's willingness to acknowledge the moral dimension of the issue is a breath of fresh air." He notes that the opposition to the Notre Dame speech isn't coming from the "pious masses" but from "Catholic Republican front groups" like Fidelis, the Catholic League and the Cardinal Newman Society. He concludes that even "if the party faithful can be convinced that the culture war's benefits outweigh its costs, the radical voice will continue to dominate the Republican agenda" (Korzen, Huffington Post blogs, 5/8).
~ "'Conscience Rules' Ignore Patient," Sally Steenland, Washington Post's On Faith: President Obama's proposed rescission of the Bush administration's HHS provider "conscience" rule "should set a fairer balance between the rights, needs and responsibilities of providers and patients," Steenland, a senior policy adviser at the Center for American Progress, writes. Steenland adds that the Obama administration's final version is expected to be released soon. The public debate surrounding the current rule "is usually framed as one of provider conscience vs. patient access," she says, adding, "The problem is that this frame ignores the conscience of the patient." For example, she writes, a woman might be taking birth control because of a decision from her conscience, and when a pharmacist refuses to fill that woman's prescription, the pharmacist is "defying the patient's conscience in favor of his or her own." Steenland continues, "One conscience should never trump all others." She writes that "we must find ways to negotiate conflicting consciences so that religious liberty is respected and health care is safeguarded" (Steenland, Washington Post's On Faith, 5/11).
~ "In Choosing Souter's Replacement, Obama Should Follow the Lead of ... George W. Bush?," Mitchell Bard, Huffington Post blogs: Bard writes that the "single most important thing" he learned in law school was that "U.S. Supreme Court justices are far more powerful in shaping American society than the average person realizes," adding that "the selection of a justice to the Court is one of the most important decisions a president will make during his time in office." He continues, "I have full confidence that President Obama understands the immense importance of selecting the right replacement for David Souter. My hope is that as he goes through the process, he uses as his guide" former President George W. Bush -- "the most unlikely of mentors" -- in three areas. Bard notes Obama should "influence the court for the next 20 years" as Bush did in selecting younger judges or "go Bush one better and appoint a justice in his or her early to middle 40s, giving the candidate the opportunity to shape American policy for 30 to 40 years." Obama also should put in place "progressives to balance out Bush's conservative picks," Bard says. Furthermore, "Obama needs to select someone with an unassailably qualified resume," as "a lack of qualification is the only lifeline to the Republicans in bringing the choice down." Bard concludes that if Obama follows Bush's lead when selecting a replacement for Souter -- "a young progressive with a traditionally impressive resume -- he will have done a good job in carrying out his responsibilities" (Bard, Huffington Post blogs, 5/11).
~ "Houston Pulls a Palin," Abigail Kramer, Salon's Broadsheet: Kramer criticizes the city of Houston's recent decision to bill a woman for forensic evidence collection at a local hospital after she was raped. "A big thank you to the criminal justice establishment of Houston for giving victims one more reason not to report rape," Kramer writes. According to Kramer, Texas has a Crime Victims' Compensation Fund that automatically pays up to $700 of the cost of an investigation of sexual assault, but state law requires that victims exhaust all other potential sources before the fund pays more. Kramer writes, "This isn't the first time we've seen such dangerous nonsense." She recalls when Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), who at the time was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, allowed the city to charge victims for their own rape test kits, as well as other examples. Kramer concludes that it is difficult to know how common this practice is in other states because there is no federal law regulating who pays for what, which "would be treating rape like any other prosecutable, punishable violent crime" (Kramer, Salon's Broadsheet, 5/11).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
~ "Why We Need Bristol (And Levi)," Cristina Page, Birth Control Watch: Bristol Palin and the Candie's Foundation's "shared message to teens is: you don't want to become a teen parent," something that "traditional pregnancy prevention messages have often missed" because they "assumed that teens don't need convincing on that issue," Page writes. The Candie's Foundation recently made Palin, the daughter of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), an ambassador to promote teen pregnancy prevention. However, "there is one thing very important missing from the Candie's campaign," Page says. The national conversation on teen pregnancy "desperately needs" the involvement of teenage boys like Levi Johnston, the father of Palin's four-month-old son, Page writes. Johnston "brings with him a great chance to make boys the stakeholders they inevitably are" and "offers a unique perspective on the difficulties of being a teen father, one that will resonate with boys in a way [Palin's] point of view will not," she continues. In making Palin a teen pregnancy prevention ambassador, the Candie's Foundation is "taking a big risk," and it "would extend that risk further by giving [Johnston] an equal voice in the discussion," Page writes. She continues, "But with big risk comes the possibility for great gains, too." Palin and Johnston are "bravely offering their intensely personal misstep up for others to learn from. The may be at odds with each other, ... but they are united in their message about the not-so-glamorous life of teen parents," she says (Page, Birth Control Watch, 5/8).
~ "The Next Justice: What Obama Wants," Geoffrey Stone, Huffington Post blogs: Four factors "will be especially important" to President Obama when he is deciding on his Supreme Court nominee to replace retiring Justice David Souter, according to Stone, a law professor at the University of Chicago. Stone says that the factors include: high intellectual ability; moderately liberal stances on issues; a "strong voice" on the role of the Supreme Court; and the ability to "[b]uild a consensus within the Court." The "essence," for Obama, of the terms "moderate liberal" and "conservative" is "his continuing reference to 'empathy,'" Stone writes. He continues that Obama "wants to appoint a justice who understands that a unique role in our system of government is to be especially attentive to the interests of the unrepresented, the oppressed, political and religious dissenters, those accused of crime and minorities who have traditionally lost out in the political process." The U.S. and the Supreme Court "badly need a justice who can articulate a progressive view of constitutional interpretation, both to counter the conservatives on the Court and to change the terms of the national debate," he writes. Obama will also "want to appoint a justice who adds a measure of diversity of experience and perspective within the court," such as a woman or racial minority, Stone concludes (Stone, Huffington Post blogs, 5/11).
~ Blog Posts Examine Sex Education, Other Provisions in Obama's Budget Proposal, Jodi Jacobson/Sharon Camp/AmplifyYourVoice: Obama's fiscal 2010 budget proposal that was released last week "puts us on the road to evidence-based public health policy," Jacobson writes in a RH Reality Check blog entry. However, it "does not, unfortunately, really advance the journey towards comprehensive sex education, and is therefore a missed opportunity," she writes (Jacobson, RH Reality Check, 5/9). Camp writes in a Huffington Post blog entry that although the "most welcome development" of the budget proposal is "the abolition of 'abstinence-only-until-marriage' programs," it is important to remember that the proposal "is just a starting point" and that "Congress gets a crack at whether to accept, reject or modify the president's recommendations." Camp in the blog post assesses several areas of the budget related to women's health, including sex education, access to abortion, family planning and global health issues, among others (Camp, Huffington Post blogs, 5/8). AmplifyYourVoice writes in a Daily Kos blog entry that the Obama proposal "struck a blow to the abstinence-only community" but that "these people are not giving up." The blog post continues, "And considering that our fight to end funding for abstinence-only programs is long from over, considering that Congress must pass this budget without sneaking funding for ab-only back in, neither should we." The blog post includes links to videos of comments from abstinence-only supporters (AmplifyYourVoice, Daily Kos, 5/8).
~ "For the Culture War, a Hail Mary," Chris Korzen, Huffington Post blogs: Attempts by "culture warriors" on the right to "sabotage" President Obama's plan to give the commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame later this month "is ostensibly an effort to reassert the Church's position on abortion," Korzen writes. "In reality, the Notre Dame 'scandal' is little more than a manufactured controversy, and a predictable product of the Republican coalition's current sorry state of affairs," he continues. Korzen writes that Obama's "genuine commitment to prevention has ruffled the feathers of absolutists on both sides of the aisle. But for abortion 'grays' -- those Americans who remain conflicted about abortion, many of them moderate swing voters -- the president's willingness to acknowledge the moral dimension of the issue is a breath of fresh air." He notes that the opposition to the Notre Dame speech isn't coming from the "pious masses" but from "Catholic Republican front groups" like Fidelis, the Catholic League and the Cardinal Newman Society. He concludes that even "if the party faithful can be convinced that the culture war's benefits outweigh its costs, the radical voice will continue to dominate the Republican agenda" (Korzen, Huffington Post blogs, 5/8).
~ "'Conscience Rules' Ignore Patient," Sally Steenland, Washington Post's On Faith: President Obama's proposed rescission of the Bush administration's HHS provider "conscience" rule "should set a fairer balance between the rights, needs and responsibilities of providers and patients," Steenland, a senior policy adviser at the Center for American Progress, writes. Steenland adds that the Obama administration's final version is expected to be released soon. The public debate surrounding the current rule "is usually framed as one of provider conscience vs. patient access," she says, adding, "The problem is that this frame ignores the conscience of the patient." For example, she writes, a woman might be taking birth control because of a decision from her conscience, and when a pharmacist refuses to fill that woman's prescription, the pharmacist is "defying the patient's conscience in favor of his or her own." Steenland continues, "One conscience should never trump all others." She writes that "we must find ways to negotiate conflicting consciences so that religious liberty is respected and health care is safeguarded" (Steenland, Washington Post's On Faith, 5/11).
~ "In Choosing Souter's Replacement, Obama Should Follow the Lead of ... George W. Bush?," Mitchell Bard, Huffington Post blogs: Bard writes that the "single most important thing" he learned in law school was that "U.S. Supreme Court justices are far more powerful in shaping American society than the average person realizes," adding that "the selection of a justice to the Court is one of the most important decisions a president will make during his time in office." He continues, "I have full confidence that President Obama understands the immense importance of selecting the right replacement for David Souter. My hope is that as he goes through the process, he uses as his guide" former President George W. Bush -- "the most unlikely of mentors" -- in three areas. Bard notes Obama should "influence the court for the next 20 years" as Bush did in selecting younger judges or "go Bush one better and appoint a justice in his or her early to middle 40s, giving the candidate the opportunity to shape American policy for 30 to 40 years." Obama also should put in place "progressives to balance out Bush's conservative picks," Bard says. Furthermore, "Obama needs to select someone with an unassailably qualified resume," as "a lack of qualification is the only lifeline to the Republicans in bringing the choice down." Bard concludes that if Obama follows Bush's lead when selecting a replacement for Souter -- "a young progressive with a traditionally impressive resume -- he will have done a good job in carrying out his responsibilities" (Bard, Huffington Post blogs, 5/11).
~ "Houston Pulls a Palin," Abigail Kramer, Salon's Broadsheet: Kramer criticizes the city of Houston's recent decision to bill a woman for forensic evidence collection at a local hospital after she was raped. "A big thank you to the criminal justice establishment of Houston for giving victims one more reason not to report rape," Kramer writes. According to Kramer, Texas has a Crime Victims' Compensation Fund that automatically pays up to $700 of the cost of an investigation of sexual assault, but state law requires that victims exhaust all other potential sources before the fund pays more. Kramer writes, "This isn't the first time we've seen such dangerous nonsense." She recalls when Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), who at the time was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, allowed the city to charge victims for their own rape test kits, as well as other examples. Kramer concludes that it is difficult to know how common this practice is in other states because there is no federal law regulating who pays for what, which "would be treating rape like any other prosecutable, punishable violent crime" (Kramer, Salon's Broadsheet, 5/11).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
суббота, 10 марта 2012 г.
Blogs Comment On Sotomayor Confirmation Hearings, Health Reform, Other Topics
The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.
~ "Judge Sotomayor Provides Important Testimony on the Constitutional Right to Privacy and Its Application to Reproductive Rights," Marcia Greenberger, Womenstake: "One major line of questions, asked repeatedly throughout the hearings" for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor was her "views on the constitutional right to privacy," Greenberger writes, adding, "Given that this right is central to women's lives, protecting" such "decisions involving whether to bear children ... and having consensual adult sexual relations, it is important to analyze Judge Sotomayor's answers carefully." According to Greenberger, because Sotomayor "had not ruled directly on the right to privacy as a federal judge, her testimony in this area warrants particular attention." Following questions from senators such as Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Sotomayor portrayed a "clear agreement with the right to privacy and strong description of the court's current precedents regarding Roe and women's health," which "lend[s] further support to the view from her legal record that she would not undermine Roe v. Wade if confirmed to the Supreme Court" (Greenberger, Womenstake, 7/16).
~ "Major Steps Forward for Health Care Reform," Thao Nguyen, Womenstake: Nguyen, outreach manager for the National Women's Law Center, reports that the health care reform legislation passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee is "particularly important for women because of the critical headway it makes towards women's ability to secure access to quality, affordable health care throughout their lives." The bill "works towards confronting many of the particular obstacles faced by women in our current health care system," such as banning the "discriminatory" practice of basing insurance premiums on gender, even when maternity benefits are excluded, Nguyen writes. The bill also bans insurance companies from rejecting patients based on medical history, which has prevented many domestic violence survivors and women who have had caesarean sections from obtaining coverage. Nguyen concludes that "the momentum for health care reform could not have come at a more needed time" because women and their families "need quality, affordable and comprehensive health more than ever" (Nguyen, Womenstake, 7/15).
~ "Democrats for Life of America Ousts Member Who Supports Contraception," Feministing: Feministing reports that Democrats for Life of America removed Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) from its advisory board because he supports efforts to improve access to contraception. According to Ryan, he was dismissed from the board after four years after attempting to persuade the group to support contraceptive use as a way to avoid unintended pregnancies. According to the blog, "This is why we call anti-choicers 'anti-choice': because they're not just about making abortion illegal." It adds, "They don't want women to have access to contraception either -- something that 98% of American women will use at some point in their lives" (Feministing, 7/15).
~ "Umpires, Perspective and the Supreme Court," Jim Wallis, Sojourners' "God's Politics": "During his opening remarks for his own confirmation hearing in 2005, Chief Justice [John] Roberts made" an analogy between judges and umpires "that has gotten a lot of play in the media and has already been used quite a few times during" Sotomayor's confirmation hearing, Wallis writes. He adds that "nothing in the world would frustrate me more than an umpire who would call the game differently based upon the color of the jersey that" players were wearing. "But I haven't seen that happen," Wallis writes, adding, "In fact, the biggest problem we face isn't an umpire that has favored one team over the other, but umpires who make mistakes in their rulings and judgment because of their lack of perspective." He adds that Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and "others who have picked up these talking points of criticism have mistaken a very particular view of the world. They have claimed an attribute that only belongs to God." According to Wallis, the "problem is that Sen. Sessions doesn't really want impartiality; he wants judges who will see things just like he would." He concludes that a senator who "wants only one perspective isn't really concerned with truth or justice, but with the maintenance of historic dominance and control" (Wallis, "God's Politics," Sojourners, 7/16).
~ "Are You a Condom Worshipper? (Or, When the Purity Pushers Lose Their Damn Minds)," Feministing: National Abstinence Clearinghouse President Leslee Uhruh's comment that supporters of comprehensive sex education are "condom worshippers" is a good example of "why folks in the virginity movement need to rebrand their image," a Feministing blog entry states. It notes that "the majority of the country ... want[s] their kids to learn medically accurate information about sex so they can make healthy decisions." The blog continues, "That's why more media-savvy abstinence-only leaders are now using more mainstream-friendly language" and rebranding themselves as "folks interested in 'holistic approaches' and 'healthy lifestyle choices.'" The post continues that "[w]hile I'm glad to see that these organizations are scrambling, I'm also a bit wary of writing them off completely," which is why "we have to continue to be vigilant on a state and community level." The blog recommends checking Advocates for Youth or SIECUS for updates on sex education policy (Feministing, 7/16).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
~ "Judge Sotomayor Provides Important Testimony on the Constitutional Right to Privacy and Its Application to Reproductive Rights," Marcia Greenberger, Womenstake: "One major line of questions, asked repeatedly throughout the hearings" for President Obama's Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor was her "views on the constitutional right to privacy," Greenberger writes, adding, "Given that this right is central to women's lives, protecting" such "decisions involving whether to bear children ... and having consensual adult sexual relations, it is important to analyze Judge Sotomayor's answers carefully." According to Greenberger, because Sotomayor "had not ruled directly on the right to privacy as a federal judge, her testimony in this area warrants particular attention." Following questions from senators such as Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Sotomayor portrayed a "clear agreement with the right to privacy and strong description of the court's current precedents regarding Roe and women's health," which "lend[s] further support to the view from her legal record that she would not undermine Roe v. Wade if confirmed to the Supreme Court" (Greenberger, Womenstake, 7/16).
~ "Major Steps Forward for Health Care Reform," Thao Nguyen, Womenstake: Nguyen, outreach manager for the National Women's Law Center, reports that the health care reform legislation passed by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee is "particularly important for women because of the critical headway it makes towards women's ability to secure access to quality, affordable health care throughout their lives." The bill "works towards confronting many of the particular obstacles faced by women in our current health care system," such as banning the "discriminatory" practice of basing insurance premiums on gender, even when maternity benefits are excluded, Nguyen writes. The bill also bans insurance companies from rejecting patients based on medical history, which has prevented many domestic violence survivors and women who have had caesarean sections from obtaining coverage. Nguyen concludes that "the momentum for health care reform could not have come at a more needed time" because women and their families "need quality, affordable and comprehensive health more than ever" (Nguyen, Womenstake, 7/15).
~ "Democrats for Life of America Ousts Member Who Supports Contraception," Feministing: Feministing reports that Democrats for Life of America removed Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) from its advisory board because he supports efforts to improve access to contraception. According to Ryan, he was dismissed from the board after four years after attempting to persuade the group to support contraceptive use as a way to avoid unintended pregnancies. According to the blog, "This is why we call anti-choicers 'anti-choice': because they're not just about making abortion illegal." It adds, "They don't want women to have access to contraception either -- something that 98% of American women will use at some point in their lives" (Feministing, 7/15).
~ "Umpires, Perspective and the Supreme Court," Jim Wallis, Sojourners' "God's Politics": "During his opening remarks for his own confirmation hearing in 2005, Chief Justice [John] Roberts made" an analogy between judges and umpires "that has gotten a lot of play in the media and has already been used quite a few times during" Sotomayor's confirmation hearing, Wallis writes. He adds that "nothing in the world would frustrate me more than an umpire who would call the game differently based upon the color of the jersey that" players were wearing. "But I haven't seen that happen," Wallis writes, adding, "In fact, the biggest problem we face isn't an umpire that has favored one team over the other, but umpires who make mistakes in their rulings and judgment because of their lack of perspective." He adds that Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and "others who have picked up these talking points of criticism have mistaken a very particular view of the world. They have claimed an attribute that only belongs to God." According to Wallis, the "problem is that Sen. Sessions doesn't really want impartiality; he wants judges who will see things just like he would." He concludes that a senator who "wants only one perspective isn't really concerned with truth or justice, but with the maintenance of historic dominance and control" (Wallis, "God's Politics," Sojourners, 7/16).
~ "Are You a Condom Worshipper? (Or, When the Purity Pushers Lose Their Damn Minds)," Feministing: National Abstinence Clearinghouse President Leslee Uhruh's comment that supporters of comprehensive sex education are "condom worshippers" is a good example of "why folks in the virginity movement need to rebrand their image," a Feministing blog entry states. It notes that "the majority of the country ... want[s] their kids to learn medically accurate information about sex so they can make healthy decisions." The blog continues, "That's why more media-savvy abstinence-only leaders are now using more mainstream-friendly language" and rebranding themselves as "folks interested in 'holistic approaches' and 'healthy lifestyle choices.'" The post continues that "[w]hile I'm glad to see that these organizations are scrambling, I'm also a bit wary of writing them off completely," which is why "we have to continue to be vigilant on a state and community level." The blog recommends checking Advocates for Youth or SIECUS for updates on sex education policy (Feministing, 7/16).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
суббота, 3 марта 2012 г.
Women's Health Advocates Use Health Reform To Tackle Gender Biases In Coverage
Women's health organizations and advocates are drawing attention to several lesser-known provisions in health reform legislation that would improve insurance coverage and health care for women, USA Today reports. Although the congressional debate over abortion coverage has garnered the most media attention among women's health issues in the reform debate, advocates say that provisions such as prohibiting insurance companies from charging women more than men for the same policies or requiring companies to offer maternity coverage in basic plans would "affect far more women, who have received inadequate care and coverage for too long," USA Today reports. As health reform bills near the final stages, advocates are working to ensure that women's health provisions are preserved as lawmakers look to trim the legislation's cost.
According to USA Today, the National Women's Law Center reports that 40 states and Washington, D.C., allow so-called "gender rating," in which insurance companies charge women more than men for the same individual policies or charge businesses with mostly female workers higher group rates. About 4.7 million women purchased individual insurance in states with this pricing practice in 2008, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. In addition, insurance companies currently can offer policies that exclude coverage for pre-existing conditions, including past caesarean sections, or deny maternity coverage if a woman is pregnant when she applies for a policy. Insurance companies can deny coverage to survivors of domestic violence in eight states and Washington, D.C.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) said she would like the final health reform bill to include provisions requiring minimum benefits packages offered by health plans to include coverage for preventive cancer screenings for women, including mammograms and Pap tests. "When it comes to health insurance, women are discriminated against," Mikulski said, adding, "We pay more and we get less, and often we are denied care." Robert Zirkelbach of America's Health Insurance Plans said the insurance industry supports eliminating gender rating and the practice of denying coverage to domestic violence survivors. According to Zirkelbach, most plans already cover maternity care, and there is a "good chance" that basic benefits packages will include such coverage.
Some Republicans, including Sen. Jon Kyl (Ariz.), have been fighting the inclusion of maternity coverage in a basic benefits package. Kyl drew attention for his position on the issue last week in an exchange with Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), who supports the coverage. Kyl said in a hearing, "I don't need maternity care and so requiring that to be in my insurance policy is something that I don't need and will make the policy more expensive." Stabenow replied, "I think your mom probably did." According to USA Today, an online video of the senators' comments has drawn about 150,000 views on YouTube (Hall, USA Today, 10/5).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. 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.
суббота, 25 февраля 2012 г.
Illinois Pharmacists, Walgreen Reach Settlement On EC Distribution Rule
Illinois pharmacists who object to dispensing emergency contraception on moral grounds would be allowed to let another person on staff fill the prescription under a settlement filed last week between Deerfield, Ill.-based Walgreen and the state, the AP/Yahoo! News reports. According to the settlement, trained technicians or store owners would be able to contact a pharmacist at another location and then follow his or her directions for dispensing EC, which can prevent pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of sexual intercourse (Wills, AP/Yahoo! News, 10/11).
The Washington, D.C.-based American Center for Law and Justice in January 2006 filed a state lawsuit against Walgreen on behalf of four Illinois pharmacists who were suspended without pay in November 2005 for declining to dispense EC based on moral or religious beliefs. The lawsuit -- which was filed in Madison County, Ill., Circuit Court -- says the company violated the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, which allows health care providers to refuse to perform procedures that conflict with their moral or religious beliefs.
Under an Illinois rule -- which was proposed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) and approved in August 2005 by the Illinois Joint Committee on Administrative Rules -- state pharmacies are required to dispense EC if they stock any FDA-approved contraceptive or risk losing their licenses. If any prescribed contraceptive is out of stock, pharmacies must provide an alternative, order the drug, make arrangements for another local pharmacy to fill the order or return the prescription to the customer. The rule allows pharmacies to opt not to sell any contraceptives (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 1/13).
The Washington, D.C.-based American Center for Law and Justice in January 2006 filed a state lawsuit against Walgreen on behalf of four Illinois pharmacists who were suspended without pay in November 2005 for declining to dispense EC based on moral or religious beliefs. The lawsuit -- which was filed in Madison County, Ill., Circuit Court -- says the company violated the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act, which allows health care providers to refuse to perform procedures that conflict with their moral or religious beliefs.
Under an Illinois rule -- which was proposed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) and approved in August 2005 by the Illinois Joint Committee on Administrative Rules -- state pharmacies are required to dispense EC if they stock any FDA-approved contraceptive or risk losing their licenses. If any prescribed contraceptive is out of stock, pharmacies must provide an alternative, order the drug, make arrangements for another local pharmacy to fill the order or return the prescription to the customer. The rule allows pharmacies to opt not to sell any contraceptives (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 1/13).
Reaction
Francis Manion, an attorney for the pharmacists who filed the lawsuit, said the settlement is between Walgreen and the state, adding that his clients generally support it and will not continue with the litigation. "We think it's fair for us as well as our pharmacists," Walgreen spokesperson Tiffani Bruce said, adding that the deal "allows us to continue to care for patients." Attorneys said the settlement does not include any exchange of money.
"It seems to be a thoughtful settlement," Pam Sutherland, president of Illinois Planned Parenthood, said Wednesday, adding that the settlement gives pharmacists "an out, and it still makes sure the woman gets her prescription." The settlement must be reviewed by a legislative panel before it can take effect because it requires a change in state rules (AP/Yahoo! News, 10/11).
Reprinted with kind permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation© 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
суббота, 18 февраля 2012 г.
Low-Income Women Less Likely To Receive Mammograms, CDC Report Finds, USA
Women without a high school diploma or with an annual household income lower than $15,000 are less likely to receive mammograms than women with more education and a higher income, according to a CDC report published on Thursday in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports. The report, which focused on 35 metropolitan areas nationwide, examined 2000 census data and records from a national health survey conducted by telephone in 2002. According to the report, 78.5% of women ages 40 and older said that they had received a mammogram within the previous two years. Among those women, 68.4% with an annual household income of less than $15,000 underwent mammograms, compared with 82.5% with an annual household income of more than $50,000, the report found. The report said that more research is required to determine the reasons for the disparity, although the difference might result from factors such as access to health care, cost, availability of public transportation or availability of public heath clinics (McVicar, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 10/7). The complete report is available online.
"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
суббота, 11 февраля 2012 г.
Preventive Surgeries Linked To Lower Risk Of Breast And Ovarian Cancer
Women with the inherited mutations of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes who had preventive (prophylactic) breast removal (mastectomy) or the removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries (salpingo-oophorectomy) were found to have a significantly lower risk of developing ovarian and breast cancers, says a study published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association), September 1st issue.
The authors wrote that females who carry the inherited mutations of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have a considerably higher chance of developing breast or ovarian cancer - there is a 56% lifetime risk of breast cancer and 84% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer.
The authors added:
Women who are mutation carriers have cancer risk-management options that include risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, risk-reducing mastectomy, annual cancer screening, and chemoprevention.
Susan M. Domchek, M.D., of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, and team carried out a study involving 2,482 women who had the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutations to find out what their cancer risk reduction was following a prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy, incorporating mutation type (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2), and cancer history (prior history of breast cancer vs. none). The women's gene mutations were determined between 1974 and 2008.
The study was performed at 22 clinical and research genetics centers in North America and Europe. The participants were monitored through to the end of 2009.
Breast Cancer Risk: The investigators found that:
None of the women with the mutated genes who had a prophylactic mastectomy developed cancer during the 3-year follow-up period.
7% of the women with the mutated genes who did not have a prophylactic mastectomy developed cancer during the 3-year follow-up period.
Ovarian Cancer Risk: The investigators found that:
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer, with no ovarian cancer events seen during the 6 years of prospective follow-up in BRCA2 mutation carriers without prior breast cancer who underwent the procedure.
Three percent of women without salpingo-oophorectomy over a similar follow-up period were diagnosed with ovarian cancer.
The researchers found no cases of ovarian cancer among women with the BRCA 1 mutation after salpingo-oophorectomy, which was also linked to a lower risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers without prior diagnosis of breast cancer.
The authors wrote:
Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, undergoing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality (10 percent vs. 3 percent), breast cancer-specific mortality (6 percent vs. 2 percent), and ovarian cancer-specific mortality (3 percent vs. 0.4 percent).
"Association of Risk-Reducing Surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation Carriers With Cancer Risk and Mortality"
Susan M. Domchek, MD; Tara M. Friebel, MPH; Christian F. Singer, MD, MPH; D. Gareth Evans, MD; Henry T. Lynch, MD; Claudine Isaacs, MD; Judy E. Garber, MD, MPH; Susan L. Neuhausen, PhD; Ellen Matloff, MS; Rosalind Eeles, PhD; Gabriella Pichert, MD; Laura Van t'veer, PhD; Nadine Tung, MD; Jeffrey N. Weitzel, MD; Fergus J. Couch, PhD; Wendy S. Rubinstein, MD, PhD; Patricia A. Ganz, MD; Mary B. Daly, MD, PhD; Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, MD; Gail Tomlinson, MD, PhD; Joellen Schildkraut, PhD; Joanne L. Blum, MD, PhD; Timothy R. Rebbeck, PhD
JAMA. 2010;304(9):967-975. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1237
The authors wrote that females who carry the inherited mutations of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have a considerably higher chance of developing breast or ovarian cancer - there is a 56% lifetime risk of breast cancer and 84% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer.
The authors added:
Women who are mutation carriers have cancer risk-management options that include risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, risk-reducing mastectomy, annual cancer screening, and chemoprevention.
Susan M. Domchek, M.D., of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, and team carried out a study involving 2,482 women who had the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutations to find out what their cancer risk reduction was following a prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy and mastectomy, incorporating mutation type (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2), and cancer history (prior history of breast cancer vs. none). The women's gene mutations were determined between 1974 and 2008.
The study was performed at 22 clinical and research genetics centers in North America and Europe. The participants were monitored through to the end of 2009.
Breast Cancer Risk: The investigators found that:
None of the women with the mutated genes who had a prophylactic mastectomy developed cancer during the 3-year follow-up period.
7% of the women with the mutated genes who did not have a prophylactic mastectomy developed cancer during the 3-year follow-up period.
Ovarian Cancer Risk: The investigators found that:
Risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer, with no ovarian cancer events seen during the 6 years of prospective follow-up in BRCA2 mutation carriers without prior breast cancer who underwent the procedure.
Three percent of women without salpingo-oophorectomy over a similar follow-up period were diagnosed with ovarian cancer.
The researchers found no cases of ovarian cancer among women with the BRCA 1 mutation after salpingo-oophorectomy, which was also linked to a lower risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers without prior diagnosis of breast cancer.
The authors wrote:
Compared with women who did not undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy, undergoing salpingo-oophorectomy was associated with lower all-cause mortality (10 percent vs. 3 percent), breast cancer-specific mortality (6 percent vs. 2 percent), and ovarian cancer-specific mortality (3 percent vs. 0.4 percent).
"Association of Risk-Reducing Surgery in BRCA1 or BRCA2 Mutation Carriers With Cancer Risk and Mortality"
Susan M. Domchek, MD; Tara M. Friebel, MPH; Christian F. Singer, MD, MPH; D. Gareth Evans, MD; Henry T. Lynch, MD; Claudine Isaacs, MD; Judy E. Garber, MD, MPH; Susan L. Neuhausen, PhD; Ellen Matloff, MS; Rosalind Eeles, PhD; Gabriella Pichert, MD; Laura Van t'veer, PhD; Nadine Tung, MD; Jeffrey N. Weitzel, MD; Fergus J. Couch, PhD; Wendy S. Rubinstein, MD, PhD; Patricia A. Ganz, MD; Mary B. Daly, MD, PhD; Olufunmilayo I. Olopade, MD; Gail Tomlinson, MD, PhD; Joellen Schildkraut, PhD; Joanne L. Blum, MD, PhD; Timothy R. Rebbeck, PhD
JAMA. 2010;304(9):967-975. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1237
Подписаться на:
Сообщения (Atom)