Kansas has a Few Ridiculous Bills in Committee

Well, it’s only February but Kansas seems to be dead set on being named “abortion hater state of the year.” Last year more abortions restrictions were passed by the Federal and State governments since, well ever. 135 anti-abortion and anti-family planning laws were passed in 2011 alone. 92 of those specifically target abortion access. Kansas seems to want to make 2012 a repeat record breaker in the world of limiting abortion access.

Legislators there have proposed an amendment to the state constitution which would declare that a fertilized egg is a person and has the full rights of personhood. In other words it would ban abortions. If approved by the legislature, the amendment then needs to be voted on by the citizens of Kansas to be approved and on an Election Day vote, would be very unlikely to pass. Robin Marty are Care2 points out that this vote will not happen on Election Day though. It will take place on the primary vote, which have a significantly lower turn out that Election Day votes. It also has more restrictions for who can vote which could give an edge to the anti-choice movement.

The amendment still has a long way to go before it becomes a reality, but it’s not the only thing Kansas politicians have cooking. They have also proposed a bill that would announce that as far as the legislature is concerned a fertilized egg is the equivalent of a person. It’s not a “personhood amendment” just a law and includes language that the bill would theoretically protect people who have had a miscarriage but there is no guarantee that would be enacted by law enforcement agencies. The wording is vague and only protects them if the miscarriage results in “failing to properly care for herself or by failing to follow any particular program of prenatal care.” So if you don’t eat well and have a miscarriage you are ok, but what if you fall and have one? Could the police then charge you for intentionally causing the demise of a fetus because the fall wasn’t conclusively accidental? Since this is not an amendment it doesn’t have to be voted on by the general public and could then limit abortion access.

Sadly, that isn’t all Kansas has going on right now. New legislation has recently been introduced to the committee level that is, according to the Huffington Post, “One of the most sweeping state anti-abortion bills to be introduced.” It’s pretty messed up. The bill includes provisions that a doctor must inform their patients of a non-existing link between abortion and breast cancer and make the patient hear the fetal heartbeat. It would take away tax credits for abortion providers as well as remove tax-deductions for the purchase of abortion related insurance coverage. All of these issues are beyond problematic. The part that is really messed up though; is that the bill would exempt doctors from a malpractice suit if they don’t inform their patient about a medical complication or potential birth defects if providing the patient with the information might cause the patient to seek an abortion. Even if the medical complication puts the patient’s health or safety at risk, the doctor can choose not to inform her about it; even if a permanent injury result, the doctor is protected. In fact, the only way they can be held responsible for withholding the information from the patient is in a wrongful death suit. As in when the patient doesn’t get anything out of it.

Clearly some anti-choice craziness is going on over in the “Sunflower State” and needs to be nipped in the bud. Hopefully the more sane lawmakers will keep these laws from becoming reality. Either way, we will keep you posted.

Misopolis Campaign

The Abortioneers Blog introduced me to an interesting new ad campaign that was released earlier this month. It is a series of ad’s set in “Misopolis” a fictional city where the factory workers have the right to control their own lives/bodies and can get abortions on demand and without apology. Some of the ad taglines are “Abortion Pills are a Gift from God” and “Immaculate Contraception- When the Bubble Bursts, Unplanned Pregnancies Happen.” The web URL for the campaign is DieselForWomen.com and on first glance, the campaign seems to be actually from Diesel the clothing company. The ad has a similar style to those that Diesel regularly uses and there is even a faux-press release on the site.

For those of you unfamiliar with sweatshops they are factories, usually in poor and developing countries, with very little regulation. The workers are frequently women and children who are forced to work in brutal, unsafe conditions to produce clothing, electronics etc for brands that sell in more economically advanced areas. The campaign announces a new type of factory for Diesel workers in which they are treated as more than just glorified work horses. The “press release” explains that Misopolis is a factory for women workers to be treated as successful people with fair wages and proper working conditions. The release also states that the site will soon feature opportunities to view videos and photos from Misopolis as well as to donate the abortion pill to help the workers and even buy “worker’s rights friendly clothing”.

In reality the campaign is from Women on Waves, an organization that provides abortions to women in need in countries where abortion is illegal. They sail around the world providing misoprostol tablets to women seeking abortions. Misoprostol is a medication approved for treating ulcers but is commonly used to induce a miscarriage. It is one half of the medications commonly used in the U.S. for medication based terminations. Usually in the U.S. women are given Methotrexate or Mifepristone to stop fetal growth and then misoprostol is used to induce a miscarriage. Misoprostol can be used alone, though it is slightly less effective. In countries where abortion is illegal it is usually the only safe option women have to terminate a pregnancy.

Women on Waves released a statement (posted on the Diesel for Women website) detailing their motives for releasing the ad campaign. In it they state “Women on Waves designed the hoax to expose the violations of women’s rights that take place in the garment industry. The hoax is a parody on the PR campaigns and the reluctance to address human rights by the fashion industry in general and Diesel in particular. It intends to show that violations of human rights never happen in isolation and that the right to a safe abortion is connected with the broader framework of social rights, workers rights and the right to autonomy.”

I don’t know about you, but I think this is a fascinating way to raise awareness for 2 very big problems, the lack of abortion care in so many third world (and some first world) countries as well as the plight of factory workers stuck in unsafe environments. A lot of people are outraged, including Diesel, who released a statement announcing they will be taking legal action against the campaign. What do you think, is the campaign brilliant or copyright infringement? Or both?

Politicians Stand Up for Women’s Health Care

                We write about political attacks against women’s health care, specifically reproductive health care, a lot on this blog. We feel it is important to make as many people aware of the widespread contempt many conservative politicians seem to have towards ensuring women get proper and timely medical care. From mandatory ultrasounds before abortion laws to cutting funding from programs that specifically fund women’s health care providers it seems there is no lack of politicians supporting an anti-health care agenda. Something we don’t talk about as much, but which deserves attention none the less, are the politicians who attempt to stand up against these attacks.

                Recently, Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure changed their funding guidelines which would have prevented them from giving grants to Planned Parenthood for their breast screening and health education programs. Outrage was expressed by Planned Parenthood supporters all over the country including 22 Democratic Senators. The Washington Post reported that after the news broke Sen. Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ) began recruiting co-signers to a “toughly worded” letter imploring Komen to reverse their decision. According to RH Reality Check, an additional 4 Senators had signed on bringing the total up to 26. This campaign along with public pressure seems to have worked as Komen has released a statement indicating they will honor all existing grants to Planned Parenthood and will ensure that Planned Parenthood retains its eligibility to apply for future grants.

                Another attempt to support women’s health care came from Virginia State Senator Janet Howell (D-Fairfax). Conservative Senators recently proposed a bill that will require all patients seeking abortions to have an ultrasound preformed before they can have their procedure. This is a non-medically necessary imposition that is intended only to dissuade women from getting abortions. Senator Howell, in an attempt to point out the ludicrousness of imposing politics onto what should be a private decision between a doctor and their patient, proposed an amendment to the bill that would also require men seeking Viagra prescriptions be given a cardiac stress test and rectal exam before they can receive the prescription. Her amendment was defeated but the bill is expected to pass in a vote next week. On the bright side her message was received by at least 18 of her colleagues.

                One major politician who recently stood up for women’s health care is the President himself, Barack Obama. In spite of major pressure from the religious right and U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops he has refused to sacrifice women’s health care by granting a broad exemption to the requirement that health insurance plans must cover birth control. The USCCB sought a broad exemption for any religiously affiliated group to be allowed to provide plans that did not cover contraception because it goes against their religious beliefs. This would have meant a huge number of women who work for institutions like Catholic hospitals or universities would not have had coverage for contraception even though they themselves are not Catholic.

                Sometimes it’s easy to forget that there are politicians who care about women’s health care, so if your local, state or federal politicians have stood up for women’s health recently take some time to let them know it’s appreciated.

North Dakota

                Non-surgical abortions are a safe and effective way to terminate a pregnancy without requiring a surgical procedure. In the U.S. it is generally administered with two medications; the first to stop fetal growth and the second to induce a miscarriage. While is it likely that a miscarriage will occur naturally after fetal growth is halted it can take longer for this to occur which is why the second medication is used. This option is commonly chosen by women who want to avoid the invasiveness of a surgical procedure or who want to pass the pregnancy in the privacy of their homes. Whatever their reasons are for choosing a medication termination over a surgical are personal to each individual and should not be limited.

Last summer, North Dakota lawmakers banned the off label use of a common medication used in medication terminations. Most medications are approved by the FDA for one or two uses but are useful for many other medical conditions. For example Topamax® is a prescription medication FDA approved for the treatment of epilepsy in adults or children; however it has been found to also be effective in treating migraines. Doctors who prescribe it for migraine sufferers are prescribing it for an off-label use. The North Dakota law only bans off label use for a medication used in abortions; not off label use in general which makes it unconstitutional and unfairly limits the options available to abortion patients.

According to the Huffington Post the Red River Women’s Clinic performs approximately 1300 abortions a year and about 250 of them are medication based. They use mifeprex to stop fetal growth and this medication is FDA approved for that use. The problem comes with the second medication used to induce a miscarriage, misoprostol which is FDA approved for the treatment of ulcers but not abortion.

In July the Center for Reproductive Rights, on behalf of Red River Women’s Clinic, (the only abortion provider in the state) filed suit against the law and was successful in obtaining a temporary restraining order to block the law from taking effect. The judge has been hearing arguments both for and against the law and has continued the order until he makes a decision regarding a permanent block on the law.

The law leaves women with access to the drug that stops cell growth but not the drug that will actually cause the miscarriage, according to CanadianBusiness.com this is one of the issues the judge has with the law. He is quoted as saying “You’ve got one drug … that’s labeled for use in abortions, but you’ve got another drug that isn’t, and you need them both… I don’t get it. How do I get around that?” The lawyer for the state replied that mifeprex alone could induce an abortion. Judge Corwin replied: “So you’re suggesting that a doctor should give patients the (mifeprex) and just hope that that works? And if it doesn’t, then what do they do?” He also pointed out that the state didn’t provide evidence that medication abortions are unsafe or even less safe than the surgical procedure.

                Though Judge Corwin has yet to make a final decision, it seems there is reason to be hopeful that this law will be overturned.

Congressman seeks to Limit D.C. Abortions Rights

As the capital city of the United States Washington, D.C. is not a state and has only a nonvoting representation in Congress. Congress has the power to create and pass any laws for D.C. that it pleases so basically D.C. has only a facsimile of self-government. For the most part Congress doesn’t abuse this power and lets city officials be a government without a large amount of interference. One area of D.C. life that Congress is apparently totally ok with interfering in is abortion rights.

Last year as part of a national spending bill they included a ban on spending local D.C. taxes on abortion coverage through the city’s Medicaid program. This was in spite of the fact that D.C. officials and residents made it abundantly clear that they should have the right to determine how they want to spend their own money and they want to cover abortions in the city Medicaid program.

This year it seems they want to go after D.C. abortions rights again. Representative Trent Franks (R- AZ) has introduced the “District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” which would prohibit women in D.C. from having abortions past 20 weeks. Similar legislation has been introduced in a number of state legislatures based on the shaky theory that a fetus can feel pain as early as 20 week and is currently active in 5 states.

The research supporting this claim is shaky at best and in fact most researchers and medical associations including the American College of Gynecology and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists assert that fetal pain doesn’t develop until much later in a pregnancy. In fact research done by researchers at the University of California San Francisco shows a fetus most likely doesn’t feel pain until around 28 weeks. In other words a full two months after this kind of ban prohibits abortions.

The proposed law does have an exemption for the life of the mother but it does not include one for when the fetus has a defect that makes it incompatible with life even though this is one of the primary reasons people have abortions past 20 weeks. So basically the law is pointless in protecting against pain for two primary reasons. First a fetus likely can’t feel pain that early anyway. The second reason it doesn’t protect against pain is because it will actually cause pain. A pregnancy that would have been ended due to a defect will have to be carried to term; the pregnant person would have to give birth which is in fact pretty painful. Then the parents have suffered through losing the baby that can’t survive outside of the womb. It seems to me that this law is not protection; it’s mostly just cruel.

This Week in “Wait, What!?!”

               As a pro-choice activist I’m always a little flabbergasted by the things anti-choice folks say and do. I mean, I grew up Catholic, so I get where they are coming from- most of them really do believe that a fetus is a baby and that it deserves to be born. What I don’t get are the beliefs that people who have abortions don’t understand what they are doing or that birth control is the same as an abortion and all the various other beliefs that seem to go along with the anti-choice/anti-contraception view point. The logic they use to get to these ideas is always so flawed that I’m amazed people go along with it.

                This week I heard about a new anti-choice belief that put the rest to shame. Granted it seems to be just a small group of the super extreme anti-choice activists who are spreading it, but it exists nonetheless and has even gotten enough attention to cause an Oklahoma legislator to introduce a bill to keep it from happening. Apparently, some people think that food and cosmetic manufacturers are using cells from aborted fetuses in their products….

                The ridiculousness of that is so absurd that I’m not even sure how to respond to it, other than to call it absurd. This idea came to my attention through an article on the Huffington Post detailing a new bill introduced to the Oklahoma State Senate by Senator Ralph Shortey (R-Oklahoma City). The bill states that “No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients.”

            While Shortey acknowledges that, as written, the bill seems absurd he says it’s not really about finished food products; “People are thinking that this has to do with fetuses being chopped up and put in our burritos…That’s not the case. It’s beyond that… There are companies that are using embryonic stem cells to research and basically cause a chemical reaction to determine whether or not something tastes good or not… As a pro-life advocate, it kind of disturbed me that we would use aborted embryos or aborted human fetuses to extract stem cells and use them for research to basically make things taste better.”

                An anti-choice group Children of God for Life have put out information claiming that Semonyx (a company that produces artificial flavor enhancers) uses fetal cells in their research. Semonyx partners with numerous food manufacturers including PepsiCo who responded to these claims. The Huffington Post has a spokesperson quoted as saying “Unfortunately, there is some misinformation being circulated related to research techniques that have been used for decades by universities, hospitals, government agencies, and private companies around the world. These claims are meant to suggest that human fetal tissue is somehow used in our research…That is both inaccurate and something we would never do or even consider. It also is inaccurate to suggest that tissue or cells somehow are being used as product ingredients. That’s dangerous, unethical and against the law. Every ingredient in every one of our products is reviewed and approved for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”

                So basically it isn’t happening but I guess some people feel the need to proactively ensure that it never happens.

Anniversary of Roe v Wade

               January 22^nd marks the 39^th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade. Prior to this decision, abortions were illegal in most of the states because there was no federal ruling to support women’s access to it. Prior to this decision, if a woman wanted to control her own body, her own future, her own health she either had to have the money to travel to a state where abortion was legal or risk having an illegal abortion. While there were many reliable underground abortion providers such as Chicago’s Jane; most abortions were provided by untrained, unlicensed practitioners who preformed a procedure and hoped it worked. This resulted in severe injuries and often death for the woman.

                Roe v Wade brought abortion out of back alley providers and into the hands of legitimately trained and licensed health care providers. This has had huge implications for women being able to determine their own lives and values. Along with being one of the most monumental decisions in terms of women’s equality; it is also one of the controversial. Groups opposed to abortion rights have been working for the past 39 years to slowly and surely chip away at the protections Roe v Wade gives.

                According to the decision abortions cannot be restricted up to the point of viability which is generally considered to be around 24 weeks. Over the past few years however states have been passing laws that in fact restrict abortion prior to 24 weeks. The first, though not the only, to do so was passed in Nebraska and bans abortion past 20 weeks on the theory that a fetus can feel pain at that gestation. The research on the theory is spotty at best and most medical experts seem to concur that the reality is that a fetus cannot feel pain until much later in the pregnancy.

                The spotty research however was more than enough for the anti-choice zealots to pass this law and many others similar to it in other states. The Ohio State Senate is now actually debating a law that would ban abortions past the time that a fetal heartbeat can be detected, usually around 5 or 6 weeks. These laws are intentionally being passed with the purpose of getting an abortions rights group to challenge them with the hopes that when the lawsuit makes it to the Supreme Court, the conservative majority will actually overturn Roe v Wade as part of the decision.

                In order to celebrate the rights granted by Roe V Wade as well as to raise awareness to the threats these rights are facing NOW, NARAL Pro-Choice America and other abortions rights groups are hosting a myriad of events over the weekend. If you can, go and participate. And If you go, share your experiences in the comments, we’d love to hear about it!

VA Gov. Proposes Defunding Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative

                It is pretty common knowledge that the U.S. economy has been struggling for a couple of years now. The federal budget has been cutting money that goes to state run programs which has led to nearly all 50 states budgets also getting reduced. Programs all over have been getting their funding reduced but one area that has been especially hit is family planning. With a national call to cut spending anti-choice zealots leaped at the opportunity to ensure that any and all family planning programs lose money. From traditionally conservative states like Texas and Florida to moderate states like New Hampshire and New Jersey family planning programs have been reduced or eliminated from state budgets.

                Governor McDonnell seems to have joined the bandwagon by eliminating all funding to the Virginia Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative. Though Virginia’s state wide average of teen pregnancy is below the national average there are 28 cities and counties that are actually above the national average so a program was created to provide in school access to teens in some of the higher risk areas. The initiative created area run programs to teach teens about their reproductive health and how to prevent pregnancy.

                McDonnell spokesman Tucker Martin is quoted in the Washington Post saying “’this administration is focused on making state government more efficient and effective… That means looking at every state program to determine if it is actually a wise and prudent use of limited state resources. Given this program’s failure to change teen pregnancy rates in the respective communities, and the lack of a strong ongoing program evaluation, the administration believes there is a better use for these monies and other evidence-based methods that may find greater success.” (The only statistics I found to verify this reasoning show that teen pregnancy rates are in fact dropping throughout the state as a whole; if anyone knows where I can find statistics on the affected areas, please share in the comments.)

                That last part, the “other evidence-based methods that may find greater success” part, sounds like they would be willing to implement a different program with a proven background of success at preventing teen pregnancies. I seriously doubt they would actually implement a new program though. McDonnell has proven that he doesn’t care about the needs of people who can become pregnant by signed the ridiculously stringent abortion facility regulations last year; regulations which have the potential to close most (or all) of the abortion providers in the state. So not only does he not care about protecting the health and well-being of Virginian’s after they get pregnant, he is now showing he doesn’t really care to help make sure Virginians don’t get pregnant either. Good job Governor McDonnell!

Teddy Bears and Politics

               I would like to start this post by saying that I LOVE stuffed animals; they are cute, cuddly and comforting. I have them in my room as well as in storage bins in both my house and my mom’s house because I can’t bring myself to throw them away or donate them. So yeah I love stuffed animals, but there are some places where stuffed animals just don’t belong. The Ohio State Senate (or any State Senate really) is one of them.

                The anti-abortion group Faith 2 Actions apparently disagrees with that opinion. Last week they sent a group of children estimated to be around 9 or 10 into the offices of State Senators to present them with teddy bears who when squeezed played a recording of a heartbeat. They also recited a short appeal to pass the Heartbeat bill that will be voted on soon. According to quotes at the Huffington Post the children were not accompanied by adults, at least not into the offices directly.

                The Senators interviewed by the Huffington Post all express the same sentiment, basically they are appalled. This was a blatant ploy by anti-abortion groups to try and emotionally manipulate the Senators. There was no subtlety or finesse; it was just a ridiculous attempt to guilt trip pro-choice lawmakers. Of course that isn’t really surprising since Faith 2 Action is the same group responsible for a fetus testifying during the House hearing on the same bill.

                This most recent attempt at emotional manipulation was largely unsuccessful as new reports have come out stating that most of the Senators are returning the teddy bears. According to Ohio laws any gifts valued over $25 have to be reported as a gift and the bears are valued to cost $33.33. Since that is over the $25 limit most of the Senators don’t seem to feel it’s worth the effort to claim them. According to RH Reality Check, Faith 2 Action doesn’t want the bears back and have recommended the Senators donate them to CPC’s. I really hope they donate them to local children’s hospitals or homeless shelters that support families with young children instead. At least then they will go to organizations that actually try to help people instead of imposing religion on them.

                For readers who aren’t aware, the Heartbeat bill is a potential law that would ban any abortions after a heartbeat can be detected in the fetus. The Heartbeat bill passed the House in June of 2011 but has yet to be voted in the Senate. There was a scheduled vote for the end of 2011 but it was postponed until the 2012 session due to concerns by Senators who wanted more time to evaluate some changes that were made.

Personhood… Again

               I’ve said it before and I’m sure I’ll say it again, but it’s an important message so here it is again. Fetal “personhood” is ridiculous. Zygotes, embryos and fetuses are not people. Potential people certainly but they have no thoughts, no feelings, no senses, no ability to keep themselves alive (prior to the point of viability at least). All of this is in distinct contradiction to the pregnant person who can think, who do have emotions, moods, dreams and goals. The pregnant person is the only person who is directly involved in the act of being pregnant.

                Yet extremist anti-choice activists cannot seem to let go of the idea that a fetus has rights, that it has a right to occupy the womb of a pregnant person even when that person doesn’t want to be pregnant. They insist that that fetus is not only the equivalent of the pregnant person, but in fact the better of the pregnant person because the fetal life becomes more important than the pregnant person.

                Personhood Colorado have begun the process of getting a personhood amendment on to the 2012 ballot. This is the 3^rd attempt and sadly not likely to be their last. Although the group will probably get the required number of signatures to get the amendment on the ballot, much like past attempts, it is unlikely that the Colorado voters will pass it. Both previous attempts were defeated with at least 70% of voters saying no. Over in Ohio, a personhood group got the ballot initiative approved by the attorney general after making revisions and resubmitting it. They now get to begin the process of collecting signatures though unlike in Colorado it is unsure whether they will be able to get the minimum number of signatures needed.

                Recently a ballot initiative in Nevada was approved but a judge required the group seeking the amendment to change the wording used in the description they are using to explain the amendment because it was vague and didn’t provide enough details explaining the potential ramifications of a personhood amendment. They apparently didn’t like the revisions the judge made so they have refilled their petition to ensure that “unalienable right to live of every prenatal person is protected.” The new version does include a list of exemptions for certain medical issues, but birth control, embryonic stem cell research and in vitro fertilization would still be illegal under the revised amendment.

                Most recently we have Kansas jumping on board. Last week it was reported on ABC News that 25 members of the Kansas House will co-sponsor a proposed fetal personhood amendment. If a two-thirds majority passes the amendment in both chambers of the Kansas legislature then the amendment will go on the 2012 ballot for voters to decide.

                It’s an absurd concept and most rational people, even those who oppose abortion, realize that a fetus is not the equivalent to an actual breathing person. Personhood amendments have been attempted and failed in Colorado (twice) and Mississippi with voters rejecting the proposed amendments. In other states throughout the past couple of years, other states have attempted to get a personhood amendment on the ballot and regularly fail to do so. This clear lack of support isn’t stopping them from continuing to try.