Plan B Age Limit Lowered

On April 5, 2013, U.S. District Court Judge Edward Korman ordered the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to lift the age restriction on emergency contraception, known commonly as “the morning after pill” or “Plan B.” The FDA has since approved Plan B One-Step, a brand of emergency contraception, to be made available over-the-counter for women aged 15 and older.

Plan B is intended to be used when other contraception methods fail, such as when a condom breaks. The pill contains the synthetic hormone levonorgestrel, and works by preventing a fertilized egg from attaching itself to the uterine wall. It must be taken within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse. Plan B prevents pregnancy from occurring. Contrary to the arguments put forth by anti-choice lobbyists, it cannot terminate an existing pregnancy.

“This is a thinly-veiled attempt to get an abortion drug over-the-counter,” said Dr. Donna Harrison, president of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Central to the contentious debate over the ethics of the drug’s use is the disagreement over the exact moment that pregnancy begins. Pro-life arguments contend that pregnancy begins with fertilization, which typically occurs within 24 hours after intercourse, if a woman has just ovulated. However, many obstetricians and gynecologists maintain that, as it takes 5-7 days for the fertilized egg to implant in the uterus and begin to grow, if one interrupts the process before this implantation takes place, pregnancy never begins.

Despite the controversy associated with emergency contraception, the good news is women seeking to purchase Plan B will now be able to find it in the family planning and female health aisles of commercial retail stores, instead of having to rely on regular pharmacy opening hours. Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, welcomed the decision, stating:

“While there are still practical questions to resolve, this is an important step forward to expand access to emergency contraception and for preventing unintended pregnancy.”

#ToMyUnbornChild: Reflection

Shaina Craner

Do you ever have those moments when you find yourself halfway between heaving sobs and a screaming fit? Not just a couple of tears, but actual white-knuckled, can’t breathe, beating your fists on the floor rage.

I love writing for this blog, don’t get me wrong, it’s great to bring attention to important issues and events in the world. But there are times when I am looking around for stories to write about that I become overwhelmed by how crappy this world can be.

I am referring, today, to the video above. If you have yet to watch it, it is a PSA about the Twitter hashtag #ToMyUnbornChild, and the hundreds of people who used the trend as an opportunity to promise their future children bloody death if they are gay. Okay, not all promised bloody death, but they did say they would simply murder their children:

I have really just sat on my couch and sighed for the past 10 minutes because I can’t think of what to say next. I’m trying not to cry and appear crazy in front of my roommates.  I’m also trying not to sound overly-dramatic, while still expressing my utter lack of faith in humanity when people do things like this.

New law demands vaginal penetration

Virginia passed a bill last week which requires women to have an ultrasound before an abortion.

The idea in itself is insulting and ridiculous—in a way that Republican legislators seem to have trademarked. The kicker, though, is that 88 percent of abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, a time when traditional ultrasound techniques do not work. For that reason, women will be forced to have transvaginal ultrasounds, or simply put, they will have a probe inserted into their vagina, whether they want to or not.

There is no medical reason for this, it is a simple guilt tactic by anti-choice conservatives to make women rethink abortions, despite the fact that evidence shows the majority of women choose to go through with the procedure anyway.

It’s difficult to write an article about this; it has sent my head flying in so many directions I do not know how to focus. My reaction is a mix of sadness, rage and unyielding nausea, and I’ve barely begun to scratch the surface.

Let’s start at the beginning: Rationale. Why does a bill like this exist in the first place? For that we will go to Republican state Del. Todd Gilbert:

“…the vast majority of these cases [abortion] are matters of lifestyle convenience…We think in matters of lifestyle convenience and in other matters that it is right and proper for a woman to be fully informed about what she is doing.”

To sum up his comments, this bill exists become women are lazy and aren’t intellectually responsible enough to make decisions concerning their own bodies. It’s all in the interest of education.

Well, clearly. Because women get abortions like they get haircuts and couldn’t possibly have the mental or emotional capacity to understand the choice they are making.

Planned Parenthood vs. Komen

Shaina Craner

“Cry me a freaking river.”

Those are the words Karen Handel, Vice President of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, relayed to pro-choice advocacy groups—before she deleted them, that is. Handel retweeted the sentiment, which criticized pro-choice groups for responding negatively to Komen’s decision to pull funding for Planned Parenthood.

The Komen Foundation announced Jan. 31 that it would no longer fund Planned Parenthood’s breast cancer screenings made available to low-income women. The reasoning provided to the public was that a recent change in policy would not allow The Komen Foundation to support an organization under criminal investigation.

Yeah.

The excuse was taken for what it was: A thinly-veiled political move—largely engineered by VP Handel—against the pro-choice powerhouse. In an article on the Huffington Post web site, an anonymous source in the Komen Foundation points the finger at Handel as “the prime instigator of this effort.”

The source told the Huffington Post:

“She said, ‘If we just say it’s about investigations, we can defund Planned Parenthood and no one can blame us for being political.”…It was apparent to everyone in the organization that Karen was doing everything in her power to defund Planned Parenthood.”

And before you jump to declare “Hearsay!,” the article later confirmed Handel as the driving force in the drafting of the foundation’s new policy, based on e-mails between Komen officials on the day of the announcement.

Following the decision, the foundation was beaten with a fervent backlash by angry citizens, celebrities, and even members of Congress. Twenty-six senators signed a letter to Komen founder Nancy Brinkler urging her to reconsider the decision, saying:

“It would be tragic if any woman —let alone thousands of women — lost access to these potentially life-saving screenings because of a politically motivated attack. We earnestly hope that you will put women’s health before partisan politics.”

A Dark Day for Pro-Choice: Opinion

Kristen Carey

On May 4^th, the House passed HR 3, otherwise known as the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”.  In a 251 – 175 vote, it overwhelmingly passed, with 16 Democrats joining the majority.

This bill, famous for its previous language “forcible rape”,  aims to strip all funding toward abortion services, except in the cases of rape/incest and mother’s health.  While this is seemingly just the Hyde Amendment reiterated, it is more than just that: it seals the Hyde Amendment.  What many do not realize is that the Hyde Amendment is not a law- it has to be reapproved every year. This bill would make it concrete and therefore unable to be reviewed each year.  It would set it in stone.

Some think that the government should not use tax dollars toward abortion since it is such a hot button issue, and it should be able to regulate its revenue as it sees fit; these arguments, however, completely undermine the right to choice.

Attack on Planned Parenthood Not Only in Congress: Opinion

Kristen Carey

That’s right; Capitol Hill is not the only place that has its sights on cutting major funding for Planned Parenthood.  Indiana is now trying to pass legislation that would not only take $2 million out of the funding for Planned Parenthood but would also make abortions illegal after 20 weeks, unless to save the mother’s life.  It would also be mandatory that any health care provider that performs abortions tells the mother in question how abortions are linked to infertility and that an abortion may also cause major pain for the fetus.

The state’s governor, Mitch Daniels (R), has not directly said whether or not he will support this bill.  Most of his career has been centered on economic issues rather than social ones (although funding is inherently economic).  Rumors surrounding his possible bid for the presidency may also explain his reluctance to voice a strong opinion either way.  The bill has enough support in the Senate to override a veto, so it may not matter one-way or the other.

In the wake of Congress’ attack on Planned Parenthood, this news is unsettling.  Indiana is so far the first state to go after Planned Parenthood’s funding in such a manner.  If this bill is successfully passed, many more states may follow in its footsteps and launch similar attacks.

Anti-Choice South Dakota Legislation

Guest writer: Lynn M. McAlister

Across the U.S. laws are popping up that strip women of our right to self-determination, our right to make the most highly personal choices and even our right to individual freedom. Some of this stuff is so bad that it’s hard to believe. Last week I read an infuriating article about a new South Dakota law passed by the House, Senate, and governor (which doubtless, are all entities dominated by men) regulating services that are only used by women. That’s right – more abortion legislation from South Dakota. I used to joke that South Dakota makes Idaho look progressive, but after reading the news that sparked Kristen Carey’s article, I think Idaho is in close competition.

But back to the story: I decided to carry around this South Dakota article in my backpack for the last week. I thought that maybe the text would magically disintegrate, or perhaps something in my coffee that morning distorted the words I read in last Wednesday’s New York Times. But, no.

The article in the New York Times by A.G. Sulzberger still has the headline: “Women Seeking Abortions in South Dakota to Get Anti-Abortion Advice.” Governor Dennis Daugaard signed a law on March 22, requiring women to attend a consultation at a “pregnancy help center” before having an abortion. Many of these pregnancy help centers have strong religious affiliations, and are staffed by volunteers and faith-based counselors.

Feminist Vacation Part 3: Conversations

Erin Fenner

At the National Young Feminist Leadership Conference in Washington D.C. March 11 through 12, I spoke to feminists from across the country. I wanted to capture their voices and ideas. I used a recorder and a few questions as an attempt to grasp the attitudes of the different people I met.

For more information about some of the people I spoke to:

Christina Black’s blog, fem2.0 can be found at http://www.fem2pt0.com/.

Paul Seltzer and E.V. Ellington from George Washington University started the Second Sex Column, that you can find here: http://thesecondsexcolumn.wordpress.com/.

You can find more information about the Women’s Ordination Conference at http://www.womensordination.org/.

Kimberlyn Acevedo mentioned Hollaback! as a source for her senior thesis. You can find more about Hollaback! at http://www.ihollaback.org/.

Angie Young is a filmmaker who made the film: The Coathanger Project.

Measure to strip Planned Parenthood’s funding passed in the House – stop it in the Senate!

Guest writer: Lynn M. McAlister

On Friday, February 18, 2010, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to ban Planned Parenthood from all federal funding. Planned Parenthood has been frantically sending emails to its listserv for the past couple of weeks alerting supporters of this impending threat, and finally, after the house voted, the issue made the cover of the New York Times in an Eckholm article on Friday. Planned Parenthood’s website explains that it provides sexual health services on an income-based sliding scale to women and men, many of them poor and young. This is exactly the demographic most prone to sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancies, according to the Women’s Economic Agenda Project. Consequential of their poverty, the U.S. Census Bureau found in 2008 that this group is also the least likely to have health insurance to cover routine testing for issues such as cervical cancer, Chlamydia, gonorrhea, and HIV. These people rely on Planned Parenthood for discounted, life-saving service.

Statistics in the Pacific Northwest Inlander’s Sex Issue depict how people living below the poverty line in the U.S. have nearly twice as many sexual partners in their lifetimes as people not in poverty. Not providing the option for this demographic to be tested for contagious diseases leaves every one of their sexual partners – rich or poor – at risk of contracting painful, potentially fatal infections. This vote by anti-choice extremists is not only an assault on the nation’s poor; this hurts everyone. Whether you are sexually active or not, we all have loved ones who have sex, and they deserve protection. Barring people from procedures such as HIV testing is simply bad public health practice. In fact, this vote shows no consideration of public health whatsoever.

This proposal will go to a vote in the Senate later this week. We still have time to fight it! If you stand with Planned Parenthood, with public health and with the people you love sign Planned Parenthood’s open letter to Congress condemning this harmful measure. Encourage our leaders in the senate to stand with us! Read and sign it here.

 

South Dakota Legislation: What Exactly Does “Pro-Life” Entail?: Opinion

Kristen Carey

South Dakota tried to push through legislation that would classify murdering an abortion doctor  as justifiable homicide. The language of the bill stated that it applied to anyone attempting to harm the fetus. But, it also could be applied to the mother if her spouse feels as if she is endangering the fetus.  Seriously South Dakota?

This has quickly become a hot topic in many Feminist blogs. How long have anti-choice groups been pointing the finger at feminists and labeling them as “murderers?”  “Pro-Life” groups have long been touting their pride in being those that save “lives” by pushing for regulations against abortion.

The fact of the matter is, there is no hard evidence, outside of speculation, that “life” begins at conception.  It is not debatable that a fully developed adult is alive.  So how is it that this screaming hypocrisy can even make it into legislation?