World News Splinters and Logs

Healthcare Prof:

The following summarizes selected women’s well being related blog entries.

~ “Has the Recession Affected Abortion?” Rob Stein, Washington Post‘s “The Checkup”: Stein writes that a new analysis by the Guttmacher Institute has found that the “percentage of females getting abortions who have incomes below the federal poverty line” has increased by almost 60%. According to Stein, “There have been a lot of anecdotal reports about the recession prompting more ladies to get abortions,” as well as a Guttmacher study last year found that the recession was causing females to delay childbearing or limit the number of children they have. However, “it remains unclear” whether the recession is contributing to declines within the abortion rate within the U.S., Stein says. He adds that the new report “for the very first time … collected information about how girls paid for” abortions. The report found that about one-third of ladies obtaining abortions were uninsured, about one-third had Medicaid coverage and about one-third had private insurance. “Nevertheless, 57% of the girls paid for the procedure out-of-pocket,” Stein concludes (Stein, “The Checkup,” Washington Post, 5/5).

~ “No Cause for Complacency on Maternal Wellness,” Elizabeth Maguire, RH Reality Check: Maguire writes that new estimates of maternal mortality published recently in the journal Lancet “suggest encouraging — and long overdue — progress on what for too many years has seemed an intractable problem.” She continues that although the “global wellness community is rightfully celebrating this news,” women’s wellness advocates “also correctly caution against complacency … since deaths related to pregnancy and childbirth are notoriously among the most poorly captured well being data.” According to Maguire, the international community has a “too-common failure to muster political will on behalf of poor ladies,” which is “especially true when it comes to unsafe abortion , a critical contributor to maternal deaths and injuries that authors of the new Lancet article do not even mention.” She notes, “Unsafe abortion is estimated to account for about 13% of global maternal mortality.” Maguire writes that “unsafe abortion is one of [the] easiest causes of maternal mortality and morbidity to address, through improved access to contraception, treatment for abortion complications and safe abortion.” She adds, “As we strive together to understand and digest the implications of these encouraging new maternal mortality estimates, and to identify and replicate successful interventions, let us also have the political courage to commit resources towards the most controversial public health issues” (Maguire, RH Reality Check, 5/4).

~ “The Catholic Contraceptive Pill,” Jon O’Brien, Huffington Post blogs: “It would be a lasting and wholly positive legacy” if Pope Benedict XVI lifted the Catholic church’s ban on contraception to “allow Catholics to plan their families,” O’Brien, president of Catholics for Selection, writes. Although three separate Vatican commissions in the 1960s recommended that the church rescind its ban on contraception, Pope Paul VI in 1965 “decided to ignore the findings of those panels and condemned Catholic girls to a variety of unreliable methods if they were forced to follow the Vatican’s dictates,” O’Brien continues. He writes that is was a “significant shock” to Catholics when Pope Paul VI issued the encyclical Humanae Vitae in 1968, “proclaiming the teaching on contraception unchanged and unchangeable.” He writes, “It makes no sense to continue the Vatican’s wrong-headed approach to family planning,” adding that 98% of sexually active Catholic females above the age of 18 have used some form of contraception banned by the Vatican. “Even without the twin scourges of maternal mortality and HIV/AIDS, there are billions of good reasons to allow females to plan their families and to allow them to decide when and whether to have children: namely the 3.five billion females inside the world, of whom about 600 million are Catholic” (O’Brien, Huffington Post blogs, 5/5).

~ “Abortion Rate Rises Among Poor Girls,” Tracy Clark-Flory, Salon‘s “Broadsheet”: A recent study by the Guttmacher Institute found that the 2008 abortion rate among low-income females was more than double that of all ladies, which “should come as no real surprise” due to the fact the “proportion of women living in poverty has increased by 25% since 2000,” Clark-Flory writes. “We already knew that the recession has put many women’s pregnancy plans on hold at the same time that it has made it harder for girls to cover the cost of birth manage,” she continues. “Interestingly enough, the study found that the majority of abortion patients had some form of health insurance, and yet 57% paid for the procedure out of pocket,” including two-thirds of females with private wellness insurance, Clark-Flory says. The study also noted that “many with the poorest women qualify for Medicaid, but federal funds are restricted to paying for abortion services only in case of rape, incest and life endangerment, and only a minority of states [use] their own funds to cover abortions for low-income girls.” In these states, 92% of Medicaid beneficiaries “made use of this payment method,” according to the study. Clark-Flory writes, “It will be interesting to see how the health care bill (PL 111-148), which prohibits the use of federal funds for elective abortions, will impact these figures,” adding, “The most optimistic prediction I can offer is that broader well being care coverage will mean better access to birth control” (Clark-Flory, “Broadsheet,” Salon, 5/5).

~ “Will Ab-Only Retire With Obey?” Wendy Norris, RH Reality Check: Washington, D.C., is “swirling … with speak with the impending retirement” of House Appropriations Committee Chair Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.), Norris writes. Obey’s retirement, which he announced Wednesday, “could have major implications for reproductive well being champions,” as he “holds sway over billions of dollars in annual federal well being and human services funding,” she continues. According to Norris, Obey’s “legacy of marshalling support for comprehensive reproductive care, well being research and HIV/AIDS support services has been marred by funding ineffective abstinence-only-until-marriage programs girded by controversial and medically inaccurate religious views.” Reproductive rights advocates “will still have [their] work cut out for them” since some possible replacements — including Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) and Alan Mollohan (D-West Va.) — are “considered stalwart anti-choice Democrats who caucused with Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) to derail the wellness insurance reform bill [PL 111-148] over abortion coverage,” Norris writes. She adds, “Curiously absent from the leadership speculation is senior ranking member Rep. Norman Dicks (D-Wash.), who scores a 100% voting record by NARAL Pro-Choice America” (Norris, RH Reality Check, 5/5).

~ “Abortion War Heats Up inside the States: Tennessee Becomes Second State To Strip Abortion From Exchanges,” Igor Volsky, Think Progress‘ “Wonk Room”: “[S]tates like Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah have used this political moment” after the approval of the federal health reform law (PL 111-148) “as an opportunity to foist pet restrictions on abortion, even as millions of poor girls are more in need of the procedure than ever just before,” Volsky writes. On Wednesday, Tennessee became the second state “to officially prohibit private insurers from delivering abortion coverage, even if it’s paid for out of private funds,” he says, noting that Americans United for Life released a model bill on the issue after the passage with the federal reform law. The bill excludes exceptions for cases of rape, incest or threat towards the mother’s well being, Volsky says, adding that the legislation “goes much further” than merely ensuring “that taxpayer dollars would not be used for abortion coverage in the state well being insurance exchange.” Volsky also criticizes a “reactionary” new law (HB 2656) in Oklahoma that bars ladies who give birth to infants with disabilities from suing physicians for withholding information about birth defects during the pregnancy. Volsky writes, “The text of the bill is so incredibly broad and poorly worded, it gives doctors the powers to ‘withhold information, mislead or even blatantly lie to a pregnant woman,’ if the doctor believes it would lead her to exercise her legally protected right and undergo an abortion.” He adds that Oklahoma girls essentially “no longer have the right … to know what’s happening to their bodies or their offspring, nor do they deserve to be fully informed of their medical conditions” (Volsky, “Wonk Room,” Think Progress, 5/6).

~ “A Mother’s Day Wish for a Non-Toxic World,” Elizabeth Arndorfer, RH Reality Check: Arndorfer discusses the onset of early puberty in her seven-year-old daughter, noting that of its potential causes — obesity, premature birth and low birthweight, psychosocial stressors and formula feeding — she was most intrigued by the possible role of “exposure to toxic chemicals in our environment and everyday products.” Arndorfer continues, “When I looked into toxic chemical exposure more deeply, I was deeply disturbed … to learn that most of the 80,000 chemicals on the market today haven’t been tested for safety.” She adds, “Of the chemicals that have been studied, numerous have been linked to reproductive wellness problems, including early puberty, and also infertility, cancer and low sperm counts.” She writes that the Safe Chemicals Act of 2010 would “reform and update national chemical policy,” including requirements that chemical manufacturers release more wellness information. The legislation is “not perfect, but it’s an important start,” Arndorfer says. She continues, “I am hopeful that it will lead to meaningful reform on toxic chemicals,” adding, “I want my government to keep up on the scientific research and take dangerous chemicals off the market — rather than leaving it up to me to avoid them” (Arndorfer, RH Reality Check, 5/6).

~ “How the Pill Liberated My Mother … and Me,” Delia Lloyd, Politics Daily‘s “Woman Up”: Lloyd recalls learning of her mother’s decision to leave the Catholic Church and begin using the birth control pill within the late 1960s. Lloyd writes that her mother “explained [that] after getting four children in eight years, she didn’t want to go on feeling obliged to have more kids.” According to Lloyd, her mother’s candor was “a testament to just how important the pill — which 50 years ago this month was approved by the FDA — was to her as a symbol of so many different things: liberation from prevailing social norms, liberation from the strictures of her religion, liberation from the sexual politics of her marriage.” She writes, “As with all forms of liberation, I suspect there was some ambivalence as well.” Lloyd continues, “Perhaps that’s why she stored her pills in a nearly abandoned refrigerator in our basement,” potentially as “a way to avoid an ongoing source of tension with my father.” Lloyd says her mother’s “early and vocal embrace of birth control had a lot to do with” the fact that Lloyd is “instinctively pro-choice and pro-contraception,” despite being raised Catholic (Lloyd, “Woman Up,” Politics Daily, 5/6).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You are able to view the whole Daily Women’s Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Daily Women’s Health Policy Report is actually a free of charge service of the National Partnership for Girls & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

Article Opinions:1 posts

A Lancet World Report examines the details of the Canadian government’s strategy for the G8 maternal and child well being initiative and reactions from global wellness leaders and politicians to the plan, including the announcement during a meeting of G8 leaders Halifax, Nova Scotia, that the initiative would not support abortion.

As described by Canadian International Development Minister Bev Oda, the initiative is set to target “the continuum of care for both mothers and children, including training and support for frontline well being workers; better nutrition and provision of micronutrients; treatment and prevention of diseases such as pneumonia, diarrhoea, malaria, and sepsis; screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS; proper medication; family planning; immunisation; clean water and sanitation,” the Lancet writes.

The piece details positive reactions by well being leaders on the Canadian government’s recognition of the role of nutrition in child and maternal health and growing interest in getting the “G8 to support a nutrition Framework for Action.”

The article includes comments by many well being experts who address gaps inside the plan and notes, “G8 ministers have yet to establish how any of these ambitious goals can be reached or paid for. At the outcome of the meeting in Halifax the G8 ministers asked WHO, UNICEF, U.N. Population Fund, World Food Programme, and the World Bank ‘to develop a common set of concrete goals and associated indicators, and to develop a common methodology to determine the most effective and affordable basket of integrated interventions based on and adaptable to country-specific needs and to build in-country capacity for these assessments’” (Webster, 5/8).

The Canadian Press/Toronto Star reports on a Lancet editorial reflecting on the Canadian government’s refusal to back abortion funding as component of its G8 strategy: “An editorial within the Lancet says it’s ‘hypocritical and unjust’ that Canada get in the way of abortions abroad when Canadian girls can have them at home. … ‘This stance must change,’ the journal says” (Rennie, 5/6).

“Canada should be praised for making maternal and child wellness a priority issue for the G8. … However, a few key elements are missing from the framework. For example, there is no talk of emergency obstetric care. This omission is likely to be an oversight and should be rectified. Improving access to safe abortion services is also absent from the plan,” according to the editorial.

The editorial concludes: “Although the country’s decision only affects a modest number of developing countries where abortion is legal, bans on the procedure, which are detrimental to public well being, should be challenged by the G8, not tacitly supported. … Canada and the other G8 nations could show real leadership with a final maternal well being plan that is based on sound scientific evidence and not prejudice” (5/8).

This information was reprinted from globalhealth.kff.org with kind permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. You’ll be able to view the entire Kaiser Everyday Global Wellness Policy Report, search the archives and sign up for email delivery at globalhealth.kff.org.

? Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

House Appropriations Committee Chair David Obey’s (D) decision not to seek re-election after more than 40 years inside the House “puts a once-safe seat into play” in a Wisconsin district that encompasses a “heavy contingent of gun-owning, pro-life voters who aren’t always in sync with the Democratic leadership’s agenda,” Politico reports. Obey — who typically won elections with more than 60% of the vote — likely “would have had the toughest challenge of his political career,” according to Politico. Obey’s retirement “forces Democrats to defend yet another blue-collar, conservative-minded district — the type that is ripe for a Republican pickup in the current election environment” (Isenstadt/Kraushaar, Politico, 5/6).

During his more than 40 years in the House, Obey developed a reputation as “an old-bull liberal and behind-the-scenes dealer, with a combustible temper plus a taste for blunt candor,” according to NPR’s “All Things Considered” (Seabrook, “All Things Considered,” NPR, 5/5). Obey denied that his retirement announcement was prompted by the prospect of a difficult election in November, saying, “I’ve won 25 elections. Does anybody really feel I don’t know how to win another one?” (Hulse/Zeleny, New York Times, 5/5). Obey stated his decision not to seek re-election was prompted by his age and the passage of well being reform, a goal he said he has sought throughout his career (Rettig, U.S. News & World Report, 5/6).

With Obey’s decision, the race in his district “probably will become a toss-up if Democrats fail to field a strong candidate or if they field too many candidates and have a fractious, money-frittering primary on Sept. 14, just seven weeks ahead of the Nov. 2 general election,” according to CQ Politics (Giroux, CQ Politics, 5/7).

Politico reports that local officials are considered potential Democratic candidates, including state Sens. Russ Decker, Julie Lassa, Pat Kreitlow and Jim Holperin; state Reps. Donna Seidel, Ann Hraychuck and Amy Sue Vruwink; attorney Christine Bremer; Judge Greg Huber; and Obey district director Doug Hill (Politico, 5/6). Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Mike Tate said Democrats are expected to coalesce within the coming days behind one candidate to avoid a competitive primary (AP/NPR, 5/6). Former Langlade County Democratic Co-Chair Moira Scupien stated it is important for the primary winner to appeal to independents inside the district who are concerned with abortion and gun rights (Politico, 5/6).

Ashland County District Attorney Sean Duffy (R) — a former cast member of MTV’s “The Real World” along with a professional lumberjack athlete — “is the favorite in September’s GOP primary,” according to the AP/NPR. Duffy has received an endorsement from former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, and his campaign has attracted the support of Washington, D.C., Republicans and tea party activists (AP/NPR, 5/6).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the whole Everyday Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Daily Women’s Wellness Policy Report can be a totally free service of the National Partnership for Ladies & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

The following summarizes selected women’s well being related videos.

50 Years of the Pill: In the 1st of a two-part series on the birth control pill’s 50th anniversary, NBC News’ Nancy Snyderman discussed its significance with Ms. Executive Editor Katherine Spillar, former Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Faye Wattleton, Newsweek religion editor Lisa Miller and Christie Hefner, daughter of Playboy publisher Hugh Hefner. “Rarely in history has some thing so small been credited with and vilified for so considerably,” Snyderman said (Snyderman, “Nightly News,” NBC, 5/5). The second segment — which aired Thursday on the “Nightly News” — explored the “next generation” of contraceptives (Snyderman, “Nightly News,” NBC, 5/6).

25 Years of EMILY’s List: In a 25th anniversary tribute to EMILY’s List founder and outgoing president Ellen Malcolm, the group’s supporters reflected on her contributions to the cause of electing pro-choice Democratic girls. The video consists of comments from President Clinton; Reps. Rosa DeLauro (Conn.) and Gwen Moore (Wis.); Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Barbara Mikulski; President Clinton; many EMILY’s List board members; and other people (EMILY’s List, 4/30).

Teen Pregnancy: Bristol Palin — daughter of Sarah Palin as well as a “teen abstinence ambassador” for the Candie’s Foundation’s — visited “The View” on Wednesday to talk about her life as a teen mother. She urged teens to consider “being a single mom” just before getting sex, adding that she’s “out on her own” and delivering for herself financially. Palin also said she hopes her mother will run for office again because she would make an “awesome” president (“The View,” ABC, 5/5).

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

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

Article Opinions:1 posts
Although FDA announced its intention to approve the first birth control pill 50 years ago this week, millions of the poorest ladies within the U.S. continue to face barriers to affordable family planning, Medill News Service/McClatchy reports. According to data from the Guttmacher Institute, nearly 59% of girls who are in need of subsidized family planning services nationwide aren’t receiving care. Elizabeth Nash, a public policy associate in the institute, stated, “People think you can just go towards the corner drugstore and have your needs taken care of.” She added, “Unfortunately, there are lots and lots of men and girls who need subsidized care in this respect.”

A 2006 study — Guttmacher’s most recent assessment of access to subsidized family planning — found that 17.5 million women of reproductive age needed assistance paying for contraception. The study was released when the U.S. unemployment rate was 4.7%, about five percentage points lower than the current rate. Clare Coleman — CEO of the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which represents 90% of federally funded family planning clinics within the U.S. — said that advocates “can only predict that new data [are] going to be worse.” Meanwhile, economic constraints are leading several states to reduce or eliminate family planning funding from their budgets.

Medill News Service/McClatchy reports that California’s Family PACT program plan is considered one nation’s most successful public-private partnerships for family planning, offering assistance to about 1.8 million residents with incomes of less than 200% with the federal poverty level. Despite the program’s reach, only 55% with the California females who need services are receiving them, according to Guttmacher. Laurie Weaver, chief of the state wellness department’s Office of Family Planning, stated the “cost with the [Family PACT] program benefit is about $311 per year per client,” but the program’s most recent survey in 2002 found that it was saving the state and federal government “nearly a billion dollars every two years” by preventing pregnancies.

According to Guttmacher, Medicaid is the most common source of funding for subsidized and no-cost contraception. Under the Medicaid expansion included inside the wellness care reform law (PL 111-148), states no longer will need waivers from the federal government to expand eligibility for Medicaid family planning services, Medill News Service/McClatchy reports.

Some advocates hope that the concern of funding family planning to reduce unintended pregnancies will attract support from both sides with the aisle. Kellie Ferguson, executive director of the Republican Majority for Choice, stated that “more and more Republicans are certainly coming around to saying that we can separate prevention and planning from abortion.” She added, “Whether you’re pro- or anti-choice, we all want to see the rate and need for abortion to go down” (Snell, Medill News Service/McClatchy, 5/6).

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said, “I don’t care whether you are a Democrat, a Republican or a red state or a blue state, [unintended pregnancy] is actually a problem that we all have to take steps to address.” She added, “A window is now open with a government that understands (totally free or affordable access to contraception) is actually a basic women’s wellness issue” (Peisner, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 5/10).

Editorial Discusses Abortion, Contraceptive Access Among Poor Women

A recent Guttmacher study finding “that the prevalence of abortion among poor women … increased dramatically” from 2000 by way of 2008 provides “disturbing information for people on both sides with the abortion debate who agree that the process ought to be less common,” the Philadelphia Inquirer says in an editorial. Guttmacher President and CEO Sharon Camp said that “broader, persistent economic and social inequities” have fueled a growing disparity in unintended pregnancies between lower-income and more affluent women since the mid-1990s.

According towards the editorial, the economic recession “didn’t help the situation.” The editorial continues, “While the resulting financial constraints might have led more poor girls to delay childbearing, or limit their number of children, the report stated their poverty also might have created it more difficult to obtain contraceptives.” Although there are “multiple reasons why a woman may possibly decide to terminate a pregnancy,” the editorial concludes that the “best public policies would make sure that fewer ladies think they have no other choice” (Philadelphia Inquirer, 5/8).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You’ll be able to view the whole Everyday Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Daily Women’s Health Policy Report is actually a free service with the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

4 (2 votes)

Two recent opinion pieces in the New York Times discussed issues related to the abortion-rights debate. Summaries appear below.

~ Ross Douthat, New York Times: In their new book “Red Families v. Blue Families,” law professors Naomi Cahn and June Carbone argue that a “culturally conservative ‘red America’ [is] stuck trying to sustain an outdated social model,” columnist Douthat writes. According to Douthat, the authors contend that “[b]y insisting (unrealistically) on chastity before marriage, social conservatives guarantee that their children will get pregnant early and often, … leading to teen childbirth, shotgun marriages and high divorce rates.” Douthat writes that although conservative states “may have more teen births and more divorce,” liberal states “have many more abortions.” He notes that the teen pregnancy rates in Connecticut and Montana are “roughly identical,” but teen pregnancies in Connecticut are 50% less likely to be carried to term. New York’s abortion rate is double that of Texas, while Massachusetts’ is three times as high as Utah’s, according to Douthat. “So it isn’t just contraception that delays childbearing in liberal states, and it isn’t just a foolish devotion to abstinence education that leads to teen births and hasty marriages in conservative America,” Douthat writes, adding, “It’s also a matter of how plausible an option abortion seems, both morally and practically, depending on who and where you are.” Although the “‘red family’ model can look dysfunctional,” Douthat argues that it “reflects something else as well: an attempt, however compromised, to navigate post-sexual revolution American without relying on abortion” (Douthat, New York Times, 5/10).

~ Dorothy Samuels, New York Times: The well being care reform debate and the recent passage of several state antiabortion laws have made abortion-rights advocates “newly anxious about new assaults on women’s reproductive rights” and left antiabortion-rights groups “newly emboldened,” Samuels writes. The health reform law (PL 111-148) “contains advances for women’s reproductive health care, including enlarged access to insurance coverage for maternity care, contraception and other services,” Samuels says. However, President Obama and abortion-rights supporters in Congress “made abortion coverage vulnerable as part of the effort to secure the measure’s passage,” and several states have passed or are considering legislation that would prohibit abortion coverage in insurance plans included in the state-based exchanges which will be created under the law, she continues. In addition, about two dozen states are considering legislation to increase counseling requirements or waiting periods for abortions, and about 20 states are considering new pre-abortion ultrasound requirements. “This on top of an already onerous regimen of state restrictions that has drastically cut down on abortion providers and curtailed a woman’s ability to exercise a constitutionally protected correct,” Samuels adds. Antiabortion-rights advocates “aim ultimately to make abortion illegal,” and they have “primarily succeeded in making it harder for girls of modest and meager means to acquire a safe and legal medical process,” she continues. “The painful decision to end a pregnancy should be produced in private between a woman and her doctor — not in politically driven debate among members of Congress and state legislatures,” Samuels concludes (Samuels, New York Times, 5/10).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You are able to view the entire Everyday Women’s Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Every day Women’s Wellness Policy Report is actually a free service of the National Partnership for Females & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

4 (1 votes)

In a Newsweek opinion piece, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) writes that during the well being reform debate, he “wrestled with two longstanding personal convictions — that health care can be a national right and that federal dollars should not be used to pay for abortion.” Stupak says that his House colleagues “left [him] with no other choice” but to offer an amendment that he believed would “uphol[d] the current law that prohibits public funding for abortions — and begi[n] the most grueling period in my nearly 20 years on the Hill” (Stupak, Newsweek, 5/6). Stupak’s amendment, included within the House health reform bill (HR 3962), would have prohibited all wellness plans receiving federal subsidies from offering abortion coverage, even if the coverage was paid for with private funds (Women’s Well being Policy Report, 3/10).

Stupak continues that by the time the House approved the Senate reform bill (HR 3590) on March 21, he had “realized that health care reform would pass, so rather than vote no and lose my power to add pro-life protection, I gathered my coalition” of antiabortion-rights Democrats “to try to reach an agreement with President Obama; an executive order confirming that no federal money would support abortion.” Stupak writes that when he “put in a final call to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops” to see if the group would back the reform bill with the executive order, he was “disappointed” to hear that it still felt the bill did not include strong enough restrictions on abortion.

Stupak says the “call changed [his] relationship with the pro-life movement,” adding, “Now we had the most important piece of legislation for our movement yet — with pregnancy prevention, prenatal and postnatal care, and care for kids — and we couldn’t get support.” According to Stupak, “what stings the most” is “that people tried to use abortion as a tool to stop heath care reform, even following protections were added” (Stupak, Newsweek, 5/6).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You’ll be able to view the entire Every day Women’s Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Daily Women’s Well being Policy Report is really a cost-free service of the National Partnership for Girls & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

4 (1 votes)

Reproductive-rights groups in Mexico Thursday launched a campaign urging international tourists to boycott the Mexican resort city of Cancun, saying officials there failed to protect the rights of a pregnant 11-year-old who says she was raped by her stepfather, the AP/MSNBC reports. Members of reproductive rights groups announced an online campaign directed at tourists in English, Spanish and French.

Cancun is inside the Mexican state of Quintana Roo, which recently approved a law banning most elective abortions. The reproductive-rights advocates say doctors in a government hospital failed to notify the girl that the new law contains an exception for rape victims.

The girl plans to carry the pregnancy to term and give birth by caesarean section, according to the AP/MSNBC. Local media have reported that her mother would not have permitted her to acquire an abortion even if she were informed with the law, though advocates contend that the mother might have been pressured by antiabortion-rights groups. In recent months, more than half of Mexico’s 31 states have passed measures limiting abortion rights.

The advocates hope the girl’s case will have a similar outcome to a previous case in which a 13-year-old rape survivor was denied an abortion in Mexico and took her complaint to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The Mexican government later agreed to pay more than $33,000 towards the girl (Stevenson, AP/MSNBC, 5/6).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the whole Daily Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Every day Women’s Well being Policy Report is really a cost-free service with the National Partnership for Girls & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

5 (1 votes)

As an adviser within the Clinton White House, Solicitor General Elena Kagan — President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee — co-authored a May 1997 memo recommending that President Clinton support a compromise proposal by then-Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) that would have banned so-called “partial-birth” abortion with an exception for the wellness of the woman, the Washington Post reports (Shear, Washington Post, 5/11).

Documents from Clinton’s presidential library, reviewed by the Associated Press, show that Kagan and her boss at the time, Bruce Reed, advised Clinton to support the compromise to avoid a situation in which the Republican-led Congress would pass a stricter measure and override a presidential veto (AP/New York Times, 5/10). Ultimately the compromise measure failed, and Republicans passed the stricter bill, which Clinton vetoed (Totenberg, “Morning Edition,” NPR, 5/11).

“We recommend that you endorse the Daschle amendment in order to sustain your credibility on HR 1122 and prevent Congress from overriding your veto,” the memo said.

Kagan and Reed noted that abortion-rights groups opposed the compromise and that the Department of Justice considered the measure unconstitutional. The memo noted that another White House adviser — Rahm Emmanuel, who is now Obama’s chief of staff — also recommended that Clinton endorse the amendment.

According to the AP/Times, the memo “is more of a political calculation than a legal brief.” On Monday, White House spokesperson Ben LaBolt said that “judges confront issues differently than staff attorneys for an administration.” He noted that Chief Justice John Roberts also received scrutiny during his nomination over positions he took as a DOJ attorney during the Reagan administration.

The memo and other documents reviewed by the Associated Press don’t include Kagan’s papers from her tenure as a domestic policy adviser and associate White House counsel during the Clinton administration. Several thousand pages of Kagan’s records are expected to be released this summer. The AP/Times reports that “[b]ecause Kagan spent little time in court and never sat as a judge, she does not have the typical long history of court opinions and legal briefs” of other recent Supreme Court nominees (AP/New York Times, 5/10).

Both Sides Look for Clues on Abortion Stance

The 1997 memo casts a spotlight on abortion-rights issues, which received little attention in the immediate hours right after her nomination, the Post reports. According towards the Post, Kagan’s position on Roe v. Wade “could become a sleeper issue” inside the confirmation process, as advocates on both sides look for clues on how she might rule on privacy rights.

For the Obama administration, “the idea that Kagan might support tougher restrictions on abortion presents a complicated set of political opportunities and risks,” the Post reports. It also might fuel concerns from some liberal groups that seek affirmation that Kagan would support their issues in court rulings. However, the Post notes, “[w]ith 59 votes within the Senate, the Democrats are virtually assured of getting confirmation unless a political bombshell drops before the hearings” (Washington Post, 5/11).

Kagan Asked About ‘Conscience’ Rule in 2009

CQ HealthBeat reports that during her 2009 Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for the role of solicitor general, Kagan said she had not heard with the controversy surrounding the George W. Bush administration’s HHS provider “conscience” rule, which would have strengthened protections for well being care workers who decline services based on religious or moral beliefs. The Obama administration has proposed rescinding the rule (Jenks, CQ HealthBeat, 5/11).

Abortion-Rights Groups Respond to Kagan Nomination

Several abortion-rights groups released statements following Monday’s announcement of Kagan’s nomination towards the court. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said, “We call on the Senate to give Solicitor General Kagan a fair hearing and look forward to learning more about her views on the correct to privacy and the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.”

Planned Parenthood Federation of America President Cecile Richards stated Kagan is “an accomplished and experienced lawyer and legal scholar who has been a trailblazer throughout her career.” She added, “We are confident that Kagan will bring the dedication and commitment that have marked her career with her to the highest court within the land” (Washington Post, 5/11).

Center for Reproductive Rights President Nancy Northup stated Kagan’s “public record reveals very little about her judicial philosophy or her views on the constitutional protections in Roe.” Northup also noted, “The last Supreme Court decision on abortion was 5 to 4 and further diluted constitutional protections for abortion.” She added, “As such, it can be absolutely critical that the Senate Judiciary Committee conduct a rigorous confirmation process and thoroughly discover Ms. Kagan’s views on the constitutional protection that ought to be afforded to women seeking abortions.”

EMILY’s List President Stephanie Schriock stated, “If confirmed by the Senate, Elena Kagan would serve as the fourth woman ever to sit on the court, and the Supreme Court would have a record three women on the bench.” She added, “With her nomination the court is one step closer to reflecting the diversity that makes our country so great” (Murray, Roll Call, 5/10).

Leahy To Meet With Kagan

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) stated he intends to meet with Kagan this week and will outline a timetable for completing confirmation hearings this summer. Kagan also will start meeting with lawmakers this week, guided by White House lawyer Susan Davies (Arsenault/Viser, Boston Globe, 5/11).

Opinion Piece Examines ‘Inscrutable’ Kagan Record

In a Slate opinion piece, Dahlia Lithwick discusses the challenges conservatives and liberals face in determining Kagan’s positions, noting that, “[w]ith no judicial record to pore over, and some of the wonkiest law-review articles ever penned to her credit, Kagan has mastered the fine art of nearly perfect ideological inscrutability.” Lithwick notes, “Even [New Yorker writer] Jeffrey Toobin, her law school study partner, has virtually no idea what she really believes.” She includes links to several of Kagan’s writings and other analysts’ articles on clues to her positions.

Lithwick writes, “What nobody disputes about Kagan is that she is terrifically intelligent, an able manager, ambitious, and well-liked and that she was all that and a wheel of brie when it came to sorting out the problems she inherited as dean of Harvard Law School.” According to Lithwick, “Nobody (beyond Glenn Beck) has ever accused Kagan of being a liberal firebrand or a wild-eyed idealist,” though some of Kagan’s supporters “suggest that she could prove far more liberal than anyone expected” (Lithwick, Slate, 5/10).

New York Magazine‘s “Daily Intel” also discussed scrutiny of the memo (Amira, “Daily Intel,” New York Magazine, 5/11).

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You are able to view the entire Every day Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Everyday Women’s Health Policy Report is a cost-free service with the National Partnership for Females & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.

1 (1 votes)

Healthcare Prof:

1 (1 votes)

On Monday, Michigan Democrat Connie Saltonstall announced the end of her primary campaign for Rep. Bart Stupak’s (D-Mich.) seat, saying that the Democratic Party “pre-emptively anointed” state Rep. Gary McDowell, an abortion-rights opponent, as Stupak’s successor, Politico reports.

Several national abortion-rights groups, including NARAL Pro-Choice America, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the National Organization for Ladies, endorsed Saltonstall. She launched her campaign against Stupak in March, before he announced his retirement, and specifically targeted his antiabortion-rights views and resistance to supporting the well being reform law.

Last month, Saltonstall stated that she would not support a nominee who opposes abortion rights, which she reiterated in her statement on Monday. “I cannot support [McDowell's] anti-choice politics, and I cannot support a party that endorses candidates who vote to restrict women’s legal rights and access to well being care,” she said. She also stated that it is “time for Democrats to stop compromising on this issue,” adding, “I am proud that my campaign has raised the dialogue on wellness care and choice, and I will continue my leadership role concerning these issues” (Taylor, Politico, 5/10).

Saltonstall added that the state’s Democratic Party was “actively opposing” her campaign, which would hinder her efforts to raise money. “I am not the only candidate that has been the target of this type of manipulation,” she said, adding, “I hope that in the future the party will reject this interference and insist on an open primary allowing voters to choose the candidate who represents their values” (Campbell, Detroit Free of charge Press, 5/10).

NOW President Terry O’Neill said in a statement that Saltonstall “bravely stepped forward” to challenge Stupak, adding that the state Democratic Party treated her “disgracefully” by withholding its support following Stupak announced his retirement. O’Neill stated that Saltonstall “saw an injustice take place during the well being care debate, and she decided to do something about it.” She added, “We hope that other ladies will follow her lead and continue running for office, even when it means challenging a longtime incumbent” (Rucker, Washington Post, 5/10).

Stupak’s retirement announcement last month prompted several other Democrats — including McDowell and state Rep. Joel Sheltrown, both of whom oppose abortion rights — to enter the race. Only one other candidate — former state Rep. Matt Gilliard — shares Saltonstall’s support for abortion rights (Politico, 5/10).

Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the whole Everyday Women’s Wellness Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery here. The Daily Women’s Well being Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Ladies & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.