Tag Archives: reproductive rights

Reproductive Rights Activists Are Mad as Hell Over This Creepy New Abortion Rule

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Center for Reproductive Rights, a reproductive rights legal advocacy organization, has filed a lawsuit to stop a regulation in Texas that would require fetal remains to be buried or cremated from taking effect. The state’s Heath and Human Service Commission quietly proposed the rule last July, days after the Supreme Court’s decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt struck down two requirements of HB2, a Texas law designed to drastically reduce access to abortion. The Texas law had already led to the closure of half the abortion clinics in the state. Pro-choice advocates say the new rule regarding fetal remains is meant to further limit women’s control over their reproductive lives.

“These insidious regulations are a new low in Texas’ long history of denying women the respect that they deserve to make their own decisions about their lives and their healthcare,” said Nancy Northup, the president of CRR, in a statement announcing the lawsuit. The rule is set to go into effect December 19, but opponents argue the requirement will add burdensome costs and logistical challenges to reproductive health care services, likely adding an additional $2,000 to the cost of an abortion, according to the Funeral Consumers’ Alliance of Texas. This would make accessing reproductive services prohibitively expensive for low-income women, many of whom have lost access to affordable birth control thanks to Texas cutting public funds from Planned Parenthood and other family-planning clinics.

â&#128;&#139;The parts of HB2 that had been struck down by the Supreme Court—the requirement that doctors have admitting privileges to local hospitals and that abortions be performed in surgical centers rather than clinics—were framed as efforts to protect women’s health. Proponents of the new measure have a different argument to justify the regulation. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has argued fetal remains shouldn’t be treated like medical waste and, according to a report by the Texas Tribune, has used this stance to raise campaign funds. â&#128;&#139;”I believe it is imperative to establish higher standards that reflect our respect for the sanctity of life,” he wrote in the fundraising email. “This is why Texas will require clinics and hospitals to bury or cremate human and fetal remains.”

Texas lawmakers are expected to codify the regulation into law when they meet in January 2017. Northup argues the Supreme Court already ruled medically unnecessary restrictions on abortion unconstitutional. “The Center for Reproductive Rights will continue to fight for Texas women, and women across the nation, to ensure their rights are protected,” she promised.

Original link:

Reproductive Rights Activists Are Mad as Hell Over This Creepy New Abortion Rule

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Reproductive Rights Activists Are Mad as Hell Over This Creepy New Abortion Rule

Today Is the Anniversary of a Dark Day in Abortion Rights History

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

For decades, millions of low-income women have been prevented from getting Medicaid coverage for their abortions—a reality that disproportionately affects abortion access for women of color. The reason? The Hyde Amendment, an appropriations rider preventing the use of federal funding for most abortions. It was first passed in the House 40 years ago today.

Even in 1976, abortion rights advocates recognized that this amendment would prove detrimental to women’s reproductive health care access. Soon after its passage, the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups launched a movement to circumvent Hyde by restoring Medicaid coverage for abortions through state constitutions. Today, 15 states provide public funds for abortion coverage. But efforts to repeal the federal funding ban have gained new momentum over the last year, beginning with the introduction of the EACH Woman Act in Congress in July 2015. The bill has been stuck in committee, but this summer another proposal to repeal Hyde cropped up, this time in the Democratic Party platform, a first. Hillary Clinton also announced her support for a repeal. Now, Democrats are trying to use this momentum—as well as the Supreme Court’s historic decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, striking down two abortion regulations in Texas—to rejuvenate debate about the country’s ban on public funding for abortions.

But here’s the catch: Even if Hyde is repealed, an old and relatively obscure Supreme Court case, Harris v. McRae, could stand in the way of making public funding for abortion a reality.

The McRae case dates back to 1976, three years after the Supreme Court upheld the right to abortion in Roe v. Wade. In those in-between years, low-income women on Medicaid could use their insurance to cover the costs of abortion. And they did: An estimated 300,000 women each year used federal funds through Medicaid to help pay to end their pregnancies. Female federal employees, military personnel, and federal prison inmates also relied on federal money for abortion coverage.

But that changed in 1976, when a freshman congressman from Illinois, Henry Hyde, tacked on to a budget bill an amendment to ban the use of federal dollars toward abortion coverage. Hyde made clear on the House floor that his goal in proposing this amendment was to curb abortion access as much as possible within the confines of the law: “I would certainly like to prevent, if I could legally, anybody having an abortion, a rich woman, a middle-class woman, or a poor woman,” he said. “Unfortunately, the only vehicle available is the HEW Medicaid bill.”

Immediately after the Hyde Amendment was enacted, a group of abortion rights advocates, including the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, filed a class-action lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of women who needed Medicaid abortions and doctors who wanted to provide them, arguing that the law was unconstitutional because it didn’t equally protect the rights of poor women.

In a 5-to-4 decision in 1980, the Supreme Court upheld the Hyde Amendment, ruling that even though women should have the choice to abort, the government doesn’t have an obligation to help. “The Supreme Court basically said, ‘The government isn’t creating the problem,'” says Mary Ziegler, a legal historian at Florida State University. “‘If women are too poor to get an abortion, that’s not our problem, that’s just life.'”

Congress has approved the amendment every year since 1980, which it has to do because the measure is still just a rider on the budget. Debate over Hyde more or less went dormant after McRae, save for a failed attempt to drop the rider during the Clinton administration. As a result of Hyde, an estimated 1 in 4 low-income women aren’t able to get the abortions they want because they can’t pay for the procedure.

But Harris v. McRae means getting rid of public funding bans won’t be so easy; even if Hyde no longer exists, prohibitions on Medicaid coverage for abortion would still be constitutional, thanks to McRae. States would not be required to change the way they use public money to cover abortion. And given the conservative and often volatile politics around abortion at the state level, it’s unlikely most would make an effort to do so.

“To end Hyde but to keep McRae in place is to allow public insurance for abortion to float on the political wind,” says Jill E. Adams, a lawyer and the executive director of the Center for Reproductive Rights and Justice at the University of California-Berkeley. “My guess is it would remain the status quo.”

That’s why Adams and CRRJ have focused their attention not on ditching Hyde, but on overturning McRae. “The dream is for the court to say, ‘The nature of the abortion right compels the state to furnish the resources necessary to ensure equal access by all people,'” Adams says, because it would effectively invalidate public funding bans.

Repeal-Hyde advocates, including House Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Janice Schakowsky (D-Ill.), probably know that doing away with the budget rider will not remedy the problem. Lee, along with more than 120 co-sponsors, introduced the EACH Woman Act, a bill to require abortion coverage in Medicaid and other public health insurance programs. In that case, with McRae still alive, federal law and Supreme Court precedent would contradict each other. And yet, according to Adams, the law and the ruling would coexist until another court case was brought.

Either way, the two strategies to overturn federal funding bans might not prove successful anytime soon, despite the momentum from Whole Women’s Health, according to Ziegler. “In terms of the climate in Congress and the will to move abortion policy, it’s going to be really hard to get rid of Hyde.”

View article: 

Today Is the Anniversary of a Dark Day in Abortion Rights History

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Today Is the Anniversary of a Dark Day in Abortion Rights History

Planned Parenthood Wins in a Florida Court

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A federal judge permanently blocked parts of Florida omnibus legislation that aimed to cut off state funding for preventative health services at women’s clinics that also provide abortions, a measure that was perceived to have targeted Planned Parenthood clinics. Another provision in the law that would have vastly increased what providers have described as unnecessary records inspection requirements for abortion clinics was permanently blocked as well.

The ruling comes at a critical time for Florida—Zika is now spreading in Miami Beach and north of Miami, Gov. Rick Scott confirmed Friday. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have issued a new travel warning that advises pregnant women to avoid the area. So far, there have been 36 confirmed cases.

“We are grateful the court stepped in to stop Rick Scott in his tracks and protect access to health care,” said Lillian Tamayo, CEO of Planned Parenthood of South, East, and North Florida. “If this law had gone into effect, it would have made a bad situation even worse. With the threat of Zika growing by the day, this care is even more critical. It’s time to stop political attacks on women’s basic health care.”

The legislation passed the conservative Legislature with ease back in March, and Scott signed it into law shortly thereafter. The law specifically took aim at Planned Parenthood’s funding in the wake of a smear campaign by anti-abortion activist David Daleiden that alleged Planned Parenthood was selling fetal tissue for profit. (None of the investigations into Daleiden’s allegations have found the health care provider guilty of any wrongdoing.) In June, US District Judge Robert Hinkle temporarily put provisions in the law on hold after Florida Planned Parenthood affiliates challenged them as unconstitutional.

“The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that a government cannot prohibit indirectly—by withholding otherwise-available public funds—conduct that the government could not constitutionally prohibit directly,” Hinkle wrote in June when he placed the law on hold.

State and federal law already prohibit the use of federal funds to finance abortion procedures. The Florida law would have cut $500,000 in expected state funding that Planned Parenthood uses to fund health care screenings and a school dropout prevention program. Opponents of the law also criticized its requirements for records inspections at abortion clinics, fearing it would jeopardize patient privacy by making it easy to uncover details about mental health history, abortion care history, and HIV status.

As previously reported in Mother Jones, Scott had promised to allocate $26 million in state funds to deal with the health crisis, part of which would pay for CDC Zika prevention kits that include two kinds of mosquito repellent, tablets that kill mosquitos in water, and condoms. He has also said his office and Florida’s Department of Health were coordinating to go door to door in an effort to educate women in areas of concern about the risks Zika poses. It’s unclear whether any of those plans have been enacted.

The state could still appeal the decision, but because Scott ultimately decided to drop further legal action in this case, allowing for the injunction, it seems unlikely. Scott’s spokeswoman told ABC News that the governor is reviewing the order, and maintained that “Scott is a pro-life governor who believes in the sanctity of life.”

Originally posted here: 

Planned Parenthood Wins in a Florida Court

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Planned Parenthood Wins in a Florida Court

The Infuriating and Inspiring Story Behind the Opening of a Red-State Abortion Clinic

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Julie Burkhart wondered if her impression of Catholic nuns as quiet, meek, shy women was all wrong.

Burkhart is opening an abortion clinic in Oklahoma City, and it’s located in the same neighborhood as St. James the Greater Catholic Church. A few months ago, members of the church began holding lunchtime protests at the construction site, and one bold nun entered the clinic to harass construction workers. Then the nun demanded a meeting with Burkhart.

I went out and I told her, ‘Well, you’re never to walk onto this property unless you’re invited, and I don’t think we really have a lot to talk about,'” Burkhart said firmly.

Angry nuns aren’t the only problem that the clinic operator has had to contend with when trying to open the first new abortion clinic in Oklahoma since 1974. It’s been a time-consuming, costly enterprise in a state that has, Burkhart notes, a number of “prohibitive anti-choice laws.” Gov. Mary Fallin has signed 20 anti-abortion bills over the course of her six-year tenure, including measures that tripled the waiting period from 24 to 72 hours and banned the use of telemedicine to administer medication abortion. Although this year she vetoed one that would have made it a felony to provide abortions except in cases of miscarriage or when a woman’s life is in danger, she did so because the language in the legislation was “vague.” (Removing fetal matter after a miscarriage does not medically qualify as abortion, despite the legislation’s definition of it as such.) Legal experts contend the bill could not have survived a constitutional challenge anyway.

Burkhart’s clinic, Trust Women South Wind Women’s Center Oklahoma City, will be the only one in the state’s largest city. Since late 2014, women in Oklahoma seeking an abortion have had only two options—in Norman and Tulsa—130 miles apart. Her clinic will provide general reproductive health care—birth control, pap smears, pregnancy care, transgender care—along with abortion services for up to 21.6 weeks. When we spoke, she was getting ready to receive the final sign-off from the state regulators before the clinic opens its doors in August.

“Just because we happen to live in a more traditional, conventional, conservative part of the country, it doesn’t mean that people don’t need reproductive health care,” Burkhart says. “I think sometimes that gets lost because of the political attitudes here, but abortion is equal opportunity, whether you’re conservative or liberal or a Democrat or a Republican or whatever.”

The four-decade lull between the last opening of a new clinic in Oklahoma is representative of a broader trend: Clinics are opening at a much slower rate in recent years, due to mounting costly restrictions. According to an investigation by Bloomberg, at least 162 abortion providers have closed since 2011 and only 21 new clinics have opened, three-quarters of them by Planned Parenthood rather than private operators like Burkhart.

Oklahoma has been challenging, but Burkhart is no newcomer to the struggle for abortion rights. An activist for reproductive justice and a political consultant in Washington state, she moved to Wichita, Kansas, in 2002 and became chair of the Witchita Choice Alliance, an abortion rights group. There she began working with Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider who also performed late-term abortions and was the target of violence by anti-abortion extremists for years. His clinic was bombed in 1986, and he survived being shot in both arms by anti-abortion activist Shelley Shannon in 1993.

Burkhart considers Tiller her “mentor” and remembers him as an encouraging, “solutions-oriented” man. She was the spokeswoman for his clinic in 2009, when the physician was murdered in the foyer of his Lutheran church while he handed out bulletins for the Sunday service. He was shot in the head by Scott Roeder, an anti-abortion activist with ties to Operation Rescue, an extremist anti-abortion group with headquarters in Kansas that had long protested Tiller’s clinic.

A few weeks after his death, Burkhart told the Oklahoman, she sat in his living room and told his widow, “We have to reestablish services.”

It took four years and the creation of a reproductive rights organization—Trust Women, an advocacy group that also provides women’s health care in underserved areas—but in 2013, Burkhart opened a new clinic in Wichita, in the same space where Tiller had practiced. The following year, she set her sights on Oklahoma, and from the very beginning she faced challenges.

First was the question of financing. In 2014, she began her yearlong search for a bank that would give Trust Women a mortgage and a small line of credit to begin construction on the property she had chosen. After being turned down by banks for nearly a year, she started to fear they would have to pay cash for everything. Eventually, she found a bank and was able to move forward.

She also ran into trouble with the state Department of Health when she submitted Trust Women’s application for a license, including the blueprints of her plans to outfit the clinic in compliance with the state’s health code, which, she says, are “one step down” from an ambulatory surgical center. In June, the Supreme Court decreed that requiring clinics to be outfitted as ambulatory surgical centers constitutes undue burden, but for now at least, Oklahoma’s state regulations are still in place. “We have giant operating rooms, both here in Kansas and Oklahoma,” she said, noting that historically, most first- and early-second-trimester abortions have been safely performed in doctor’s offices. Nonetheless, the Department of Health “would not sign off on any of our applications, even though I submitted all the corrective actions time and again,” Burkhart said. “We really complied with everything that they had brought to our attention, so they kept saying, ‘No, no, no.’ My attitude was like, ‘No that’s not gonna work for us.'”

She summoned her attorneys, and in late 2015, they met with the state’s counsel to get “on the same page.” It’s been a much smoother relationship since. The Department of Health told Mother Jones that it could not comment on the licensing process.

Burkhart and her architect recruited a team of subcontractors to build their clinic to code. They vetted each one and made sure they understood the nature of the project and that it could involve some personal risk. They found a tan brick former eye clinic across from a 7-Eleven and down the road from St. James the Greater Catholic Church, and they began gutting it in December. Construction started in January.

In March, anti-abortion activist Alan Maricle from the Oklahoma-based group Abolish Human Abortion (AHA) began demonstrating at the clinic, harassing the workers and filming his arguments to upload to a YouTube page. Maricle even went so far as to find the churches where two of the contractors worshipped, calling the pastors at those churches to see if they were “cool with it.” Maricle said both pastors stood up for the contractors—he also visited both churches but said he left without speaking to anyone.

“One of the things that sets AHA apart from the pro-life movement as it appears in virtually every other part of the country is this growing understanding of the complicity of the church in what we think of as the Holocaust,” Maricle says. “We see the churches being silent—they’re playing political games with this matter…This kind of mentality leads to good, Christian people thinking it’s okay to build abortion mills.”

Burkhart quickly set up meetings with local law enforcement and erected a fence around the building. That didn’t deter the flood of more protesters, but construction continued.

Burkhart estimates construction expenses—which became more costly due to state requirements—will run up to $650,000. Add to that the cost of purchasing the building, and the final bill for the facility alone is nearly $1 million. That doesn’t include what she’ll pay for staffing, equipment, and medicine. This marks a radical change from the situation before Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (or TRAP) laws were enacted. She calls those requirements “an added layer of bureaucracy and cost, meant to be punitive for abortion providers and either prohibit them from opening or cause them to shut down, as we’ve seen in Texas.”

Even finding an OB-GYN in Oklahoma can be a challenge, although Burkhart already has physicians lined up to work. The state suffers from a severe shortage of practicing gynecologists. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reported that in 2014, 48 counties out of the state’s 77 didn’t have a single OB-GYN, and there are approximately 1.87 OB-GYNs for every 10,000 women in Oklahoma, which is below the national average of 2.65 per 10,000 women.

And she’s painfully aware of the potential danger that comes with running a clinic. As opening day nears, she can’t help but think of her former boss. She remembers his encouragement, his determination, and the way he insisted on hugs after every meeting.

“I’ve really been missing him this week,” she said. “He was just such a wonderful person to work for, and…I always just felt like we were doing such good work.”

Taken from:

The Infuriating and Inspiring Story Behind the Opening of a Red-State Abortion Clinic

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Infuriating and Inspiring Story Behind the Opening of a Red-State Abortion Clinic

Planned Parenthood Sting Videographer Cleared of Felony Charge

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday morning, Texas prosecutors dismissed the felony charge against David Daleiden, the founder of the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress, and Sandra Merritt, one of his associates, related to their work last year in creating sting videos targeting Planned Parenthood. They were facing charges of tampering with a government record over allegations that they had made and used fake drivers’ licenses to facilitate their meetings with Planned Parenthood staffers.

Under Daleiden’s leadership, the CMP last summer released a series of secretly-recorded, deceptively-edited videos which purported to show Planned Parenthood staffers negotiating the sale of fetal tissue, a practice which is illegal. Since then, 12 state-level and 4 congressional investigations have found no such wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood. Despite these exonerations, the video series continued to reverberate, spawning state and federal efforts to defund the women’s health provider.

The charges dismissed today were issued in January by the Harris County District Attorney’s office. After the CMP videos, the office had assembled a grand jury to investigate Planned Parenthood but after an extensive investigation that spanned more than two months, the group cleared the women’s health provider and chose to indict Daleiden and Merritt instead. The grand jury also charged the pair with a class A misdemeanor: offering to buy human organs, namely fetal tissue. The pair was cleared of this charge in June.

After Tuesday morning’s dismissal, Daleiden touted the victory on Twitter:

But Daleiden’s legal troubles aren’t over yet. A lawsuit filed last summer against CMP by the National Abortion Federation is ongoing, as is a suit filed by Planned Parenthood in California in January, accusing the CMP of racketeering, illegally creating and using fake driver’s licenses, and invading the privacy of, and illegally recording, Planned Parenthood officials and staff.

Link to article:

Planned Parenthood Sting Videographer Cleared of Felony Charge

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Planned Parenthood Sting Videographer Cleared of Felony Charge

Watch: Attacks on American Abortion Providers Over the Years

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A new video from the Thomson Reuters Foundation shows a chilling timeline of violence against abortion providers over the past two decades, from the 1993 murder of Dr. David Gunn in Pensacola, Florida, up through the recent shooting at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

But perhaps the most heart-stopping detail is that abortion providers are in increasingly short supply—Reuters reports that in 1982, there were 2,908 providers in the United States. In 2011, that number had dropped to 1,720.

Democrats in the House are calling for Rep. Marsha Blackburn to end the “witch hunt” of the Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, which was formed by John Boehner last fall to explore allegations that abortion clinics are selling fetal tissue for profit. (There has been no evidence thus far to prove this.) Democratic members have expressed concern that the aggressive allegations put forth by Blackburn and the Republicans on the panel endanger researchers and abortion providers.

You can watch the video below:

Link to article:  

Watch: Attacks on American Abortion Providers Over the Years

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch: Attacks on American Abortion Providers Over the Years

Oklahoma Governor Vetoes "Insane" Abortion Bill

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Friday afternoon, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin vetoed a bill that would have made performing most abortions a felony in the state. On Thursday, the Oklahoma Senate passed the bill 33-12, with no floor debate. During the voting process, Sen. Ervin Yen, the sole state senator who is a physician, called the measure “insane.”

As Mother Jones reported in April, the bill would make performing abortions, except for those intended to save a woman’s life, a felony punishable by a minimum of one year in prison.

If it is discovered that they have provided an abortion, doctors would be stripped of their state medical licenses. The only exception to these rules would be abortions to save the life of the mother, and the bill makes clear that the threat of suicide by a woman seeking an abortion doesn’t fulfill the “life” requirement.

Had the bill been signed into law by Gov. Fallin, it would most certainly have led to a protracted and costly legal battle over the bill’s constitutionality, since its near total ban on abortion goes against Roe v. Wade—the landmark Supreme Court case that legalized abortion. However, the prospect of litigation is not what Fallin took issue with when rejecting the bill. Instead, she said that the “life” exception provided in the bill was “vague.”

“The bill is so ambiguous and so vague that doctors cannot be certain what medical circumstances would be considered ‘necessary to preserve the life of the mother,'” Fallin said. “While I consistently have and continue to support a re-examination of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, this legislation cannot accomplish that re-examination. In fact, the most direct path to a re-examination of the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade is the appointment of a conservative, pro-life justice to the United States Supreme Court.”

Read this article – 

Oklahoma Governor Vetoes "Insane" Abortion Bill

Posted in FF, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oklahoma Governor Vetoes "Insane" Abortion Bill

Teenagers Are Having Fewer Kids—Here’s Why

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The number of teenage women having children has hit an all-time low, thanks in large part to increased contraceptive access and use among Hispanic and African American teenagers, according to a new report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For decades, the United States has had higher rates of teen pregnancy than most other developed countries. But recent increases in access to contraception, particularly to long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) such as IUDs and implants, have helped women of all ages reduce the chances of unintended pregnancy. Since 2002, LARC use has increased five-fold, with most of that change being due to greater use of IUDs.

Though the CDC stopped short of completely attributing the drop in teen births to contraceptives like LARCs, according to the report “preliminary data” suggests that the use of evidence-based reproductive health services, including contraceptives, is what has led to the huge drop in childbirth among young women over the last ten years.

The drop was particularly notable among Hispanic and African American teenagers. Birth rates for young Hispanic women fell 51 percent since 2006, and for black teenagers 44 percent. That’s a big deal, because Hispanic and African American teenagers have historically had much higher rates of teen pregnancies than their white counterparts. Ten years ago, the birth rate for Hispanic teens was nearly 80 births per 1,000 women, but the rate for white teens was around 25. Now, the rate for Hispanic women is closer to 40.

Still, even though the number of white teens having children has also decreased, black and Hispanic teens still have twice as many pregnancies as their white peers. According to the report, that’s because social inequalities, like income and education, and employment opportunities, remain low in communities of color and influence rates of teen pregnancy.

“The United States has made remarkable progress in reducing both teen pregnancy and racial and ethnic differences,” CDC Director Tom Frieden told the Washington Post. “But the reality is, too many American teens are still having babies.”

Read More:

Teenagers Are Having Fewer Kids—Here’s Why

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Teenagers Are Having Fewer Kids—Here’s Why

Here’s How Tennessee’s Extreme Anti-Abortion Amendment Could Face Its Downfall

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In 2014, Tennessee voters amended the state constitution and gave state lawmakers almost unlimited power to restrict abortion. But last week, a federal judge ruled that the method used to count the votes in support of Amendment 1 was “fundamentally unfair” and ordered a recount.

The challenge was brought by eight Tennessee voters, who had voted ‘no’ on the amendment. U.S. District Judge Kevin Sharp ruled that their votes were not given the same weight as votes in favor of the amendment, which passed by 53 percent, because of the way that the Tennessee law to amend the state constitution is structured. Election officials have 20 days to submit a recount timeline for the court’s approval.

The confusion stems from language in the Tennessee constitution that dictates how the votes on an amendment should be counted. It states that the amendment can only be passed if “a majority of all the citizens of the state voting for Governor” also voted in favor of the amendment.

The Tennessean reported that “state election officials have long interpreted the language to mean that for an amendment to succeed, it must garner a majority of the votes cast for governor, regardless of whether the same individuals voted for both governor and an amendment.”

Sharp’s order referred to an anti-abortion strategy during the campaign that encouraged the voters who were in favor of Amendment 1 not to vote in the governor’s race. (The incumbent candidate, Gov. Bill Haslam, was projected to win by a wide margin anyhow—the Democratic candidate was largely thought to be unlikely to succeed.) By casting a ballot only for the amendment, the logic went, the votes cast by those in favor of the amendment would essentially “double,” Sharp’s ruling noted, because the number of votes needed for it to pass would be lower. That meant the amendment needed to garner only more than half the number of votes submitted for the governor’s race.

“In this case, Plaintiffs voted for governor and against Amendment 1,” Sharp wrote. “Their votes, however, were not given the same weight as those who voted for Amendment 1 but did not vote in the governor’s race.”

As Tennessee anti-choice lawmakers sought support for Amendment 1, they said the measure was a step toward revoking Roe v. Wade in the state. And since the amendment’s passage, a number of TRAP laws—targeted regulation of abortion providers—and a 48-hour waiting period have come through the state legislature. Some measures that passed have been put on hold by a federal judge.

According to the Tennessean, the plaintiffs remain optimistic. At a news conference on Monday, the plaintiff’s lawyers said there is a “path by which Amendment 1 would fail on recount.”

Vanderbilt law professor Tracy George, who is a board member of the Middle and East Tennessee Planned Parenthood affiliate and one of the eight plaintiffs in the suit, said the amendment has a “good probability” of failing on the ordered recount. In 2014, nearly 80,000 people—five percent of voters—did not vote in the governor’s race.

George said that if those 80,000 voters also voted “to support Amendment 1, under the recount, their votes no longer would count on the Amendment 1 race.” That means, she added, “If all of the people who didn’t vote in the governor’s race were pro-Amendment 1 voters, then Amendment 1 fails on recount.”

View the original here:

Here’s How Tennessee’s Extreme Anti-Abortion Amendment Could Face Its Downfall

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s How Tennessee’s Extreme Anti-Abortion Amendment Could Face Its Downfall

How an Anti-Vax Scientist Helped Inspire the Planned Parenthood Videos

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After Theresa Deisher received a doctorate in molecular and cellular physiology at Stanford, she worked in a lab that studied heart muscle cells. One day, representatives from a biomedical company came to her workplace to sell fetal heart tissue. Deisher asked them how and where they got the tissue. “They told me ‘miscarriages,'” Deisher says. I was like, ‘Woo hoo!'” But later she was confronted by one of the research assistants.‘How can you be so naive?'” Deisher remembers the assistant saying. “‘You know that’s not from miscarriages; think about it, you’re better than that.'”

She did think about it, and eventually her previous ease with a woman’s right to choose was replaced by a conviction that the fetus was a human being and that, therefore, both abortion and the use of fetal tissue for research were morally wrong. “I don’t care what someone’s opinion is on abortion or women’s reproductive rights,” she says. “I just don’t believe that people really could support a living baby harvested like that for their organs.”

She founded Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, a small nonprofit in Seattle dedicated to finding alternatives to vaccines that she describes as “manufactured in cell lines that were derived from electively aborted babies,” and she became a prominent activist in the anti-abortion and anti-vax movements. She is also credited with inspiring and educating David Daleiden, the self-proclaimed “citizen journalist” who now faces a second-degree felony charge of tampering with a government record and a misdemeanor charge of illegally offering to purchase human organs from Planned Parenthood doctors in his now infamous—and discredited—undercover video recordings.

How the stories of Theresa Deisher and David Daleiden intersected, and how her work as an anti-abortion activist aligns with her work in the anti-vax movement, reveals a great deal about the attempts by the movement opposing abortion to marshal science to support their agenda. An interview with Daleiden in the National Catholic Register characterized it this way: “Theresa Deisher helped to prepare Daleiden for his role as a biomedical representative, teaching him the ins and outs of the field.” Deisher’s company links to the National Catholic Register story on its website, and its newsletters repeatedly tout Deisher’s connection to Daleiden. “It was the work of Sound Choice that brought the human exploitation of biomedical research to the attention of The Center for Medical Progress,” the December newsletter states. Children of God for Life, an anti-vaxxer organization that warns against “aborted fetal vaccines” like Gardasil, has been cheering on Daleiden’s Center for Medical Progress from social media. Not long after the videos went viral, the group posted a link on its Facebook page to Daleiden’s interview with the National Catholic Register: “God bless Dr. Deisher for her help in exposing Planned Parenthood!” The group’s website identifies Sound Choice as one of its partners, and in January it posted a petition to clear Daleiden of his pending charges.

In the past, anti-abortion organizations focused on moral arguments to justify their position. But scientific research, much of it discredited, has been increasingly used to legitimize their opposition. For example, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG)—a counterpart to the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)—maintains through “international studies” and some marginal scientific research that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer. (The National Cancer Institute has since disputed this claim.) Another popular anti-abortion position that has come up in subsequent congressional hearings regarding Daleiden’s videos is that fetuses developed past 20 weeks are “pain capable.” The medical consensus is that the fetus must be nearly full-term before the systems necessary to sense pain are developed enough.

In an interview with The Church Boys podcast, Deisher explained that although she was not involved with shooting or editing any videos for the Center for Medical Progress, she had spoken to Daleiden regularly over the years and advised him in his research. “Just to make the Center for Medical Progress aware of how the material was being described, how the harvest was being described, and, most importantly, my suspicions that some of these babies were alive when they were being harvested,” she said.

Deisher and Daleiden’s relationship began about four years ago, when Daleiden called her asking for some help. Deisher said Daleiden had not been aware of “the day-to-day pervasive way” fetal tissue is used in biomedical research before he encountered her work—she can’t recall whether he’d heard her speak or had read one of her papers—and he wanted to know more. Together, they pored over articles in scientific publications, and Deisher explained the terminology. “What I did was translate science to him,” she said. “In many publications, it was very clear that especially the heart and brain research—where the stated optimal gestational age is 22 to 24 weeks for the best material, and those are times when babies are viable outside of the womb—it was very clear that some of these babies might have been alive when they were harvested.”

Viability has been a hotly debated subject since 1973, when the Supreme Court essentially legalized abortion in Roe v. Wade. One of the central points of the ruling concerned the “viability” of the fetus, arguing that state governments cannot prioritize the interests of a fetus over the interests of a pregnant woman until a time at which the fetus could survive outside the womb. Put simply, this has been interpreted as meaning that as long as a fetus could not exist outside its mother’s womb, it was basically not an individual person, and abortion remained a woman’s choice up until that imprecise point.

Since that time, medical technology, access to health care, and subsequent Supreme Court decisions about abortion have complicated the question of viability. A study published last year by the New England Journal of Medicine found that a very small number of 22-week-old babies could survive outside the womb, but it’s impossible to prescribe a blanket term of viability to a gestational age because survival depends on an array of factors. Researchers at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, or ANSIRH, say viability can only be determined when taking into account the health of the pregnant woman and her fetus. Determining factors include “chromosomal abnormalities, the sex of the fetus, the conditions of a woman’s health, and the availability of sophisticated neonatology care.”

Deisher says her ideology is backed by science that works with her Catholic faith rather than against it. She takes issue with the use of fetal material for any scientific work on a moral basis, but scientifically the heart of her argument against vaccines is this: “When we use an animal- or a plant-based system to manufacture vaccines, there are animal- or plant-based contaminants that will be in the final product, and we mount an immune response to them and eliminate them from our body. In the case of the human fetal cell lines, those contaminants are human, and they could trigger an autoimmune attack, or what is called insertional mutagenesis.” Her nonprofit’s website has pages dedicated to the theories that vaccines cause autism and the use of fetal stem cells can cause cancerous tumors.

Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, says autoimmune theory is not plausible. “It’s like throwing a pingpong ball off the top of the Empire State Building and hoping that it lands in one of 7 billion little fishbowls.” In this analogy, the genetic material in vaccines represents Offit’s “pingpong ball,” and the “little fishbowls” are the cells in our bodies that are protected by cellular membranes, which would have to be penetrated by the DNA. Additionally, the DNA in the vaccine would have to do so without damaging the cell membrane to effectively contaminate it the way Deisher claims. Vaccines do contain some genetic material from the fetal cell lines they were derived from decades ago, but the amount is incredibly tiny— nanograms, which are roughly one-billionth of a gram. The material is highly fragmented to boot, and for genetic material to make its way into a cell, it would require an extraordinary chemical process. Offit notes that if what Deisher claims were actually true, “it would be the best news for gene therapy ever.”

Deisher disagrees with the previous Mother Jones article that reported the hindrance of life-saving research involving fetal tissue as a side effect of Daleiden’s videos. “It’s not true that there is no substitute for fetal tissue,” she says. “We have a very nice technology now called induced pluripotent cells that more effectively model what a postnatal heart cell does.”

Tim Kamp, the co-director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Center, said it’s impossible to make pluripotent cells (also known as iPS cells) develop in a petri dish the way humans develop in utero—for that, and for the research on heart disease pioneered by his colleague Gail Robertson, they need fetal tissue. “There are aspects of developmental biology that can’t be done using iPS cells,” Kamp said. “There are different tools used for different research. You want to have access to all the different tools you can, but taking fetal tissue off the table will slow progress. It’s pretty straightforward.”

Deisher’s overall goal—to find alternative vaccines that weren’t developed using fetal cell lines—is not an impossibility. But Offit says it’s complicated, and the process of developing a new vaccine, putting it through clinical trials, and obtaining all the proper licensing along the way could amount to “hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars” in costs. “In the world of things we need to worry about and prevent, this is not one of them,” Offit said. “It’s more a perceptual problem than a physical problem; there’s nothing unsafe about that vaccine.”

Deisher believes the claims put forth by Daleiden’s videos—that Planned Parenthood has been “harvesting” fetal tissue to sell for profit. Twenty states so far have either cleared Planned Parenthood of wrongdoing or decided to not investigate, and five congressional committees have also failed to find any evidence of wrongdoing. Still, Deisher maintains that the videos from the Center for Medical Progress reveal a dark truth. “A picture says a thousand words,” Deisher said. “As a scientist, I can talk clinically ’til I’m blue in the face. When people see the pictures—it doesn’t matter if you’re religious or not—I think it really cuts to people’s hearts.”

The Planned Parenthood sting videos have had an undeniable effect on both the abortion debate and the questions around vaccines. As I previously reported for Mother Jones, the political controversy surrounding Planned Parenthood has undermined medical research and poses a potential threat to the safety of scientists. Further exacerbating this effect is a GOP-led House committee that recently issued subpoenas to eight medical institutions, demanding the names of researchers, students, and doctors. Democrats are calling this effort a “witch hunt;” committee chair Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) insists the group is simply trying to “get the complete picture,” as she told the New York Times. Five states have banned research on fetal tissue—Indiana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, and Oklahoma. Arizona bans the transfer of fetal tissue for research, and Florida bans the “purchase, sale, or transfer of fetal remains.”

For Deisher, her faith continues to be the final word when it comes to the debate surrounding Planned Parenthood. “You know, we get so caught up in pro-choice or pro-life, and if we throw the politics aside and really think about it, wouldn’t we all like a world where a woman didn’t have to make that choice?” she says. ” I think most people would; I think we’re all pro-life.”

Link to original – 

How an Anti-Vax Scientist Helped Inspire the Planned Parenthood Videos

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Paradise, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How an Anti-Vax Scientist Helped Inspire the Planned Parenthood Videos