November 11, 2017

As Jane Doe Case Shows, Justice for All Includes Young People

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
[2] Comments 

While many organizations and individuals have been fighting to protect the health, rights, and identities of youth for decades, it’s clear there’s still a long way to go.

Young activists gather outside of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in support of Jane Doe on October 20.
 Lauryn Gutierrez / Rewire

 

As I watched the case of Jane Doe unfold, I kept thinking about the young people that I work with every day who organize to protect the rights of youth like Jane.

After fleeing abuse in her native Central American country, 17-year-old Jane sought refuge in the United States only to discover her pregnancy after being detained by U.S. authorities. She wanted an abortion because she knew what was best for her as a young immigrant. Unfortunately, she ran up against a veritable Trumpian wall of systemic barriers—political agendas designed to deny the humanity of people in detention by withholding health care under the assumption that young people cannot make informed choices, especially in regard to abortion. One of the young people I work with in Chicago, Brie Garrett, once expressed, “Health care is our human right, and everyone deserves to have access to opportunities and systems that help their lives.”

The American Civil Liberties Union stepped in to take her case, and #JusticeforJane became a rallying cry. The case was argued in legal courts and in the court of public opinion. After more than a month of obstruction, Jane persevered. Through the tireless efforts of her attorneys and her unbelievable strength and courage, Jane was able to get the abortion care that she needed. This was not because the current administration changed its policy or opened its heart to care about this young woman. Every chance federal officials got, they took advantage of her status as a young immigrant woman in custody to advance their agenda of demeaning immigrants and putting up obstacles to abortion care. Now the Justice Department is threatening disciplinary action against the lawyers who argued on Jane’s behalf after they expedited the case and provided robust and necessary advocacy for their client.

This issue is far from over. We know there are many more young women currently being held in federal detention facilities who are being denied abortion access and other health services. Achieving justice for one young woman is not enough. We must continue to fight for people caught up in our broken immigration system and those facing obstacles created by harmful state laws that force young people to seek consent or to notify a parent before they can seek an abortion.

We know that most young people talk to their parents about decisions concerning their own futures, but the fact is that some simply cannot. We can support families in building communication and trust, but a law cannot guarantee the safety youth deserve. Laws like Illinois’ Parental Notice of Abortion Act and policies on the books in 37 states that force young people to involve their parents put youth in difficult, sometimes truly dangerous, positions.

We as a society must confront our discomfort with youth sexuality and realize restrictions to care inflict real damage on young people who deserve to live their lives, whether they seek an abortion or plan to become parents. Judgment and stigma serve no positive purpose. In the words of Jane Doe in a statement she made after the ruling: “No one should be shamed for making the right decision for themselves. I would not tell any other girl in my situation what they should do. That decision is hers and hers alone.”

Young people are making important decisions about their lives every day. Strong families and communities emerge when we ensure that young people can decide who they trust to seek out for support and guidance and when we do not allow politically motivated obstacles to get in the way of timely, quality care.  That is what it looks like to actually put the best interests of young people first.

There are Janes all over this country—young people who are making decisions that are best for them. Justice for Jane does not end with one case. While many organizations and individuals have been fighting to protect the health, rights, and identities of youth for decades, it’s clear there’s still a long way to go. Our work has only just begun.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/11/08/jane-doe-case-shows-justice-includes-young-people/

 

November 11, 2017

Mexico baby death trial reveals growing persecution of women who miscarry

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
1 Comment 

Dafne McPherson was convicted of murder after her baby died during childbirth – part of a growing trend to criminalise women in conservative parts of the country

Demonstrators supporting a woman’s right to an abortion march in downtown Mexico City in 2007.
 Demonstrators supporting a woman’s right to an abortion march in downtown Mexico City in 2007. Photograph: Dario Lopez-mills/AP

The day that Dafne McPherson’s life came apart began like any other: she dropped her seven-year-old daughter Lia at school, then started her shift in the children’s clothing section of the Liverpool department store in the central Mexican city of San Juan del Río.

At around 5pm, she felt a sharp abdominal cramp and spoke to the store nurse, who told her nothing was amiss. But shortly afterwards, in the second-floor bathroom, McPherson went into labour. She says she hadn’t even realised that she was pregnant.

McPherson is currently serving a 16-year sentence after she was convicted of homicide for the death of her baby in what she says was a miscarriage.

Her case gained national notoriety when court videos surfaced in which the prosecutor described McPherson’s alleged actions as something “not even a dog would do”.

But activists say the trial demonstrates a growing trend in which Mexican prosecutors in conservative parts of Mexico criminalise women who have miscarriages or complicated childbirths by accusing them of intentionally inducing abortion – which remains illegal in much of the country.

“When they started investigatng Dafne, it was as an abortion investigation, not a homicide case,” said Karla Michel Salas, a human rights lawyer familiar with McPherson’s case.

The persecution of women who have miscarriages started after Mexico City decriminalised abortion a decade ago. In response, other states introduced further restrictions on women’s reproductive rights, Salas said.

Most of the women charged in such cases are poor and unable to find a competent lawyer to defend them, she added.

Dafne McPhherson, who was jailed after having a miscarriage.
 Dafne McPhherson, who was jailed after having a miscarriage.

Officials in Querétaro – a staunchly Catholic state – said the prosecutor would be sanctioned for his disparaging comments about McPherson, but they stood by the case.

A new legal team has filed an appeal for McPherson. But her family fails to understand how their daughter – a single mother – had turned into such a priority for prosecutors.

“Why is there such vindictiveness?” said Edna Veloz, McPherson’s mother. “Who wins in this?”

McPherson’s family and legal team allege that the case was mishandled from the moment she started feel abdominal pains on 17 February 2015.

Paramedics found McPherson unconscious in the bathroom, having suffered a massive loss of blood.

Prosecutors accuse McPherson of murdering her baby by repeatedly flushing the toilet; her lawyer Aureliano Hernández said the baby fell in when she fainted, and the toilets flush automatically.

McPherson was taken to the hospital and released later that night. But state investigators were already building a case against her.

Lawyers for McPherson allege that no real investigation was undertaken. Instead, they say that prosecutors searched for witnesses to confirm a preconceived version of events.

“[The investigation] was all focused Dafne as if she were responsible for everything that happened,” Salas said.

McPherson was detained on 2 September 2015. According to her family, her first lawyer charged a fee but did nothing to build a defence.

A second lawyer was disqualified on the eve of the trial because he had not prepared for Mexico’s newly implemented judicial system, which theoretically provides for the presumption of innocence and oral arguments in court.

A public defender was assigned at the last minute, but called no witnesses and presented no exculpatory evidence, such as a diagnosis from McPherson’s physician that she suffers from hypothyroidism. The condition causes weight to fluctuate and may have explained why she had not realised she was pregnant, her new legal team argues.

The trial lawyer also failed to object to the prosecutor’s comparison of McPherson to a dog and did not challenge the prosecutor’s unsubstantiated claim that she knew she was pregnant and tried to hide her condition, Hernández said.

McPherson was found guilty on 16 July last year. In a final indignity, her family says the public defender told them the sentence was lenient and McPherson would be released early for good behaviour.

Prison hasn’t been easy for McPherson, a shy woman who inherited her surname from an Irish great-grandfather. She hasn’t seen her daughter since she was arrested, because the family followed the advice of a psychologist who recommended that they should not tell Lia that her mother was incarcerated.

“We tell her she’s in the hospital,” said Veloz.

Recently, Lia – now nine – told her grandmother that she had dreamed her mother had returned, Veloz said. “The only thing I can tell her is: she’ll be back with us soon,” she said.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/08/mexico-miscarriage-trial-perscution-women-abortion

 

November 10, 2017

Anti-Choice Activists Won’t Denounce Longtime Abortion Rights Foe Roy Moore

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
1 Comment 

Roy Moore is accused of sexually abusing a 14-year-old girl in 1979.
 Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Troy Newman, president of Operation Rescue, called the allegations of sexual misconduct with a minor “absolutely ridonkulous” and “far-left baloney.”

Religious imposition laws are designed to shield private individuals and businesses from complying with nondiscrimination laws based on a religious objection to that service.

Anti-choice organizations continue to support Roy Moore, the Republican nominee for a U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, amid accusations of sexual misconduct with a minor.

Moore is accused of sexually abusing a 14-year-old girl in 1979. Three other women said he romantically pursued them when they were teenagers and he was in his thirties, according to a Washington Postreport that quotes all four women on the record.

Some prominent Republicans have saidthat Moore should withdraw from the December 12 special election if the allegations are true—though they have not specified what kind of additional evidence they would require.

Several members of the anti-choice movement, however, are steadfast in their support for the Republican Senate candidate.

Troy Newman, president of the radical anti-abortion group Operation Rescue, told Rewire on Friday that he stands by Moore “110 percent.”

Newman, whose endorsement is highlighted on Moore’s campaign page, once penned a book that, according to Right Wing Watch’s Miranda Blue, suggests people who have abortions should be treated like murderers and that “abortionists” should be executed.

“This is typical far-left baloney,” Newman said of the allegations against Moore. “The guy stood for statewide office now the fourth time. [It is] obviously one of the most important moments in our nation’s history when it comes to the Senate, and now this person comes out. It’s absolutely ridonkulous.” He said he was not at all worried that the allegations could be true. “If it was so disturbing and so horrible, why did this person wait” to tell their story, he said.

The anti-choice movement’s dedication to Moore despite the allegations may be due to his devotion to its cause. Moore promoted his opposition to abortion rights when he first announced his Senate run, and he made no secret of his anti-choice views during his time on the Alabama Supreme Court. He has suggestedthat the September 11 terrorist attacks may have been part of the “consequences” the United States faces for legalizing abortion.

Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association Action, is listed as having endorsed Moore on the candidate’s website. The anti-choice organization, which is the 501(c)(4) arm of American Family Association, stood by Moore in an emailed statement: “AFA Action believes Justice Roy Moore to be a truthful man and a solid Christian. Based on his statement of denial we are proud to stand by our endorsement of Justice Roy Moore.”

Cal Zastrow, an anti-choice activist connected to Operation Save America (OSA) and co-founder ofPersonhood USA, said he is excited to continue to support Moore’s campaign. “I’m so excited to keep volunteering for Judge Roy Moore in his campaign for the U.S. Senate! I know him. He is a righteous man,” Zastrow said on a post to his Facebook page Thursday evening.

National Right to Life did not respond to emails asking whether they stood by their endorsement of Moore. After the Washington Post story was published, Moore sent his supporters an email asking for their financial support amid the “most vicious and nasty round of attacks against me I’ve EVER faced.” The email included a graphic plugging the anti-choice group’s endorsement.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council (FRC), said on Twitter Friday afternoon, “The allegations reported by the media against Roy Moore are beyond disturbing and, if true, would disqualify him or anyone else engaged in such behavior from holding a position of public trust.” He did not mention whether Family Research Council Action PAC plans to withdraw its endorsement of Moore. FRC in an email to Rewire referred to Perkins’ tweet when asked for the group’s response to the allegations against Moore.

Sam McLure, who is running for the Republican nomination for attorney general in Alabama and has targeted abortion care providers on social media, told Rewire in an email: “Let’s give some time to see how these allegations play out.”

“If they are true, then a man in a position of trust took advantage of a practical orphan. That’s dispicable [sic] … if true,” he said. “However, given Moore’s track record of faithfully serving our state for longer than I’ve been alive, I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt.”

https://rewire.news/article/2017/11/10/anti-choice-activists-wont-denounce-longtime-abortion-rights-foe-roy-moore/

 

November 10, 2017

Equal access to abortion means Mifegymiso’s cost must be covered in all provinces

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
Leave a Comment 

Newfoundland and Labrador still hasn’t said whether it will cover the $300 price tag

Newfoundland and Labrador has just two providers of surgical abortion province-wide.

Newfoundland and Labrador has just two providers of surgical abortion province-wide. (Phil Walter/Getty Images)

Accessing abortion services for all Canadians seemed to become much easier with Health Canada’s 2015 approval of, and recent easing of restrictions on, Mifegymiso, commonly known as the “abortion pill.”

“Seemed” is the key word here, however. It’s still tougher to get access in Newfoundland and Labrador than it is in many other parts of Canada.

Why? The hefty $300 price tag.

Alberta, Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Québec have all pledged universal cost coverage of the abortion pill, but we are still waiting on a statement from the government of Newfoundland and Labrador regarding this issue.

Considering the geographic limitations of accessing a surgical abortion in this province — with the only two providers being located in St. John’s — it’s clear that the province is grossly under-serviced. The abortion pill offers a less invasive and theoretically more accessible alternative to a surgical abortion, but the cost could very well be prohibitive for some individuals in the province.

Abortion Pill

Full cost coverage from the government for the abortion pill would transform access to abortion services in rural and remote areas of the province. (Charlie Neibergall/Associated Press)

A surgical abortion can involve one or two appointments, depending on which provider an individual selects. The cost for the procedure itself is covered by the provincial health care plan, but those who live outside of St. John’s are on the hook for associated expenses including travel, accommodations, child care, and so forth.

An individual from Labrador, for example, may have to pay over $100 per night for hotel accommodations and as much as $1000 for a round-trip flight to St. John’s (along with meals, child care and rental car fees, of course), not to mention loss of income due to absence from work.

The abortion pill practically eliminates these costs, but still presents a financial burden of its own with its $300 price tag. Full cost coverage from the government would transform access to abortion services in rural and remote areas of the province.

Mifegymiso consists of two drugs – mifepristone, which stops the production of the hormone progesterone that is necessary for pregnancy, and misoprostol, which causes uterine contractions, essentially inducing a miscarriage. Health Canada approved Mifegymiso in July 2015 for use in the first nine weeks of pregnancy and the drug can be obtained through a prescribing health professional or pharmacist.

But the fact that the cost of Mifegymiso is covered in some provinces but not others calls into question the universality of our health care system. This has really been a prolonged question, considering the total lack of access to abortion in P.E.I. until very recently. (At the time of writing, the P.E.I.’s government has made no indications as to whether it plans to cover the cost of the abortion pill).

Unequal access

Universality is a key principle of the Canada Health Act, meaning that all insured residents of the Canadian health care system should be able to receive the same level of care, regardless of where they live. Yes, everyone in Canada theoretically has access to the abortion pill, but only those of certain financial means truly have access if they live in certain parts of the country.

This essentially creates a two-tiered system, which Darrah Teitel of Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights argues is a violation of the Canada Health Act. Health Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor said in late Octoberthat her office is prepared to “speak to all [their] provincial and territorial officials to see if [they] can move forward on this,” adding that they “want to ensure that all women have access to the reproductive health services that they need.”

That’s a positive sign, but it means very little to those in Newfoundland and Labrador and other provinces who might need Mifegymiso now, but can’t pay the cost.

Having the right to choose is only meaningful when all options are available for selection. The World Health Organization (WHO) lists Mifegymiso as an essential medicine with proven efficacy and low rates of major complications. So, the question is this: if certain provinces, the federal government and the WHO have identified Mifegymiso as essential to optimizing access to abortion services, then why hasn’t the provincial government here done the same?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/mifegymiso-cost-nl-1.4395267

 

November 9, 2017

Watchdog: Massachusetts Fake Clinic Illegally Deceives Abortion Patients

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
Leave a Comment 

“The Center appears to be advertising abortion services that it intends not to offer in apparent violation of the law.”

The violations detailed in the complaint can carry fines or even imprisonment, but O’Connor said her hope is that Healey’s office stops the fake clinic from deceiving people.
 Shutterstock 

Religious imposition laws are designed to shield private individuals and businesses from complying with nondiscrimination laws based on a religious objection to that service.

A consumer watchdog group has filed a complaint with Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey accusing an Attleboro crisis pregnancy center, or fake clinic, of breaking state law by masquerading as an abortion clinic.

The Campaign for Accountability sent the complaint Thursday after Rewire revealedhow the website for Attleboro Women’s Health Center offers detailed information about abortion procedures, cost estimates, and appointments “to discuss the abortion methods that may be available to you.”

That offer “seems incompatible” with the fact that the center does not provide or even refer for abortion care–a reality it concedes at the bottom of the website’s “About” page, the complaint notes.

“The Center appears to be advertising abortion services that it intends not to offer in apparent violation of the law,” Katie O’Connor, legal counsel with the Campaign for Accountability, wrote in the complaint.

O’Connor’s complaint accuses the fake clinic of deceptive business practices and misleading advertising. In addition to “deliberately trying to confuse and deceive” abortion patients, the website has inaccuracies about the purported psychological risks of abortion care and the unproven claim that a medication abortion can be reversed, O’Connor notes.

The center is located about half a mile from Four Women Health Services, an abortion clinic whose mission statement Attleboro Women’s Health Center appears to have copied nearly verbatim on its website.

The complaint also alleges the fake clinic is making unauthorized use of a corporate name. That’s because Attleboro Women’s Health Center shares an address and business hours with Abundant Hope Pregnancy Resource Center, a self-described “Christian pro-life ministry.”

“We are under that umbrella,” a representative at the health center told Rewire, when asked if the health center is the same organization as Abundant Hope.

The health center’s website is registered to Darlene Howard, executive director of Abundant Hope, an affiliate of Heartbeat International, which describes itself as the world’s largest network of crisis pregnancy centers, and instructs these anti-choice clinics to conceal their intentions by scrapping religious language, for example.

“Abundant Hope appears to be operating as Attleboro Women’s Health Center, yet does not appear to have filed an amendment to its articles of incorporation in apparent violation of Massachusetts law,” O’Connor wrote in her complaint.

Howard was unavailable for comment on the complaint.

Attempts to regulate crisis pregnancy centers at the state, county, and city levels have faced legal challenges. But Attorney General Healey has taken steps to protect abortion access, reaching a settlement agreement this year to prohibit a Boston-based firm hired by anti-choice groups from targeting “abortion-minded women” in Massachusetts with digital propaganda while they visit abortion clinics. The settlement also followed a Rewire investigation.

“Massachusetts has really robust consumer protection laws and obviously an attorney general who’s willing to enforce those laws,” O’Connor told Rewire. “We’re hopeful in this pretty egregious case that she would decide to investigate.”

A spokesperson for Healey confirmed the office has received the complaint about Attleboro Women’s Health Center and will review it. The violations detailed in the complaint can carry fines or even imprisonment, but O’Connor said her hope is that Healey’s office stops the fake clinic from deceiving people.

“I think what I would most like to see is the Attleboro Women’s Health Center having a website that more accurately describes what it actually does,” O’Connor said.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/11/09/watchdog-massachusetts-fake-clinic-illegally-deceives-abortion-patients/

 

November 9, 2017

Anti-abortion lawmakers push ‘Conscience Protection’ bill

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
Leave a Comment 
Anti-abortion lawmakers push ‘Conscience Protection’ bill
© Greg Nash

Anti-abortion lawmakers in the House and Senate are pushing for language in the end-of-year spending bill that they say would protect health-care professionals who don’t want to take part in abortions because of their personal objections.

The Conscience Protection Act would allow health-care providers like nurses and doctors to sue if they’re coerced into participating in abortions or if they face discrimination at work for refusing to do so.

It would also provide legal recourse for hospitals, health systems, religious charities, churches and insurance companies who are required to participate in or provide coverage for abortion.

Current law prohibits discrimination against health-care providers who refuse to participate in abortions, but doesn’t allow for those who say they’re discriminated against to pursue legal action.“Congress needs to act now,” said Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), a sponsor of the bill and the chairwoman of the House Budget Committee.

“It is time for this comprehensive, reasonable and modest bill to be voted on so we can allow millions of Americans who believe as I do in the sanctity of life to abide by those beliefs without having them trampled on by their own government,” said Black, who is running to be governor of her state.

The bill’s language was included in the fiscal year 2018 House appropriations package passed earlier this year, and supporters say they’re pushing for it to be included in the end-of-year spending package in December.

Congress must approve a new spending bill by Dec. 8 or the government will shut down.

The conservative House Freedom Caucus and the Pro-Life Caucus have pushed unsuccessfully for similar language to be included in past year-end spending bills.

Supporters of abortion rights argue the proposal would facilitate discrimination against women seeking abortion care.

Anti-abortion lawmakers push ‘Conscience Protection’ bill

 

November 8, 2017

The Country’s Largest Abortion Fund Launched This Week

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
[4] Comments 

“The right to abortion is meaningless if you can’t afford to pay for it.”

Most abortion patients say they’re unable to afford another child.
 Shutterstock 

Religious imposition laws are designed to shield private individuals and businesses from complying with nondiscrimination laws based on a religious objection to that service.

Alana found herself in a bind this summer when she discovered the abortion care she wanted would cost $650—more than she could afford.

“I was really close to having enough, but it was kind of like the difference between paying a bill, and not paying a bill,” said the 29-year-old Seattle woman, who is uninsured. Rewire is withholding her last name for privacy.

Alana was referred to The CAIR Project, a Washington-based abortion fund.

“I was really surprised it existed, I don’t know why,” Alana said. “It’s kind of an amazing thing.”

This week, The CAIR Project merged with Oregon’s Network for Reproductive Options. The new fund, known as the Northwest Abortion Access Fund, is the nation’s largest abortion fund by geography, serving Washington, Oregon, Alaska, and Idaho.

More than 70 abortion funds operate through the United States, often flying under the radar or discovered only in times of crisis. A pregnant person might lack health insurance, or find the deductible is beyond their means, or live in a state like Idaho where Republican lawmakers have largely banned abortion coverage in public and private health plans. Half of calls to what is now the Northwest Abortion Access Fund come from Idaho. In other cases, it’s the cost of travel or accommodations that are prohibitive.

The unintended pregnancy rate among women living below the poverty line is five times higher than the rate for those at or above the poverty line, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Most abortion patients say they’re unable to afford another child. They say adding to their family will interfere with their job, schooling, or ability to care for their family. A five-year study of about 1,000 women seeking abortion care indicated that the cost of the procedure and logistics like travel amounted to more than one-third of their monthly income.

“The right to abortion is meaningless if you can’t afford to pay for it,” Nadia Piedranhita, a board member with Northwest Abortion Access Fund, said in a statement. “Our callers are forced to choose between paying rent or paying for their abortion. One caller had to pawn her wedding ring. Another had to return the Christmas gift she’d bought for her toddler.”

The two abortion funds fielded up to 70 calls per week before the merger. Piedranhita said some were military service members shocked to find their insurance doesn’t cover abortion services because of the discriminatory Hyde Amendment, which blocks federal funding of abortions with few exceptions.

Alana lives in Washington state, where Medicaid and many private insurers cover comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortions. But her income level puts her in a bind: She makes too much to qualify for Medicaid and too little to afford insurance on the Affordable Care Act exchange, she told Rewire. The unplanned pregnancy had her scrambling.

“You kind of beat yourself up because you didn’t intend to be a mother, and you don’t like the situation where you are,” she told Rewire.

The CAIR Project paid $150 so she could afford to end her pregnancy.

Not everyone is so fortunate. With a weekly budget of around $3,300, the money for the average grant, which is $180, often runs out by Tuesday or Wednesday, according to the fund. Those that need assistance must then reschedule their appointments, ask for time off of work, or find a sitter and a ride. The fund helps pay for travel and lodging, and gave out $32,000 in 2016, according to a statement.

Alana said the financial strife took a toll. She said her only alternative would’ve been to ask her mother for money.

“She’s really religious. She would have done it, but it would’ve hurt our relationship,” Alana said. “She definitely would’ve wanted me to have the baby.”

Alana was glad she didn’t have to.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/11/03/countrys-largest-abortion-fund-launched-week/

 

November 8, 2017

Arizona Owes $600,000 for Pushing Unproven Abortion ‘Reversal’ (Updated)

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
1 Comment 

Arizona doctors blasted Republicans for backing the state law, branding it as “tantamount to quackery.”

Arizona doctors blasted Republicans for backing the state law, calling it “tantamount to quackery.”
 Shutterstock 

The state of Arizona is on the hook for more than $600,000 in legal fees over a 2015 Republican-backed law promoting an unproven treatment described as abortion reversal.

A federal judge signed the legal fees order Monday, as the Associated Press reported. Arizona now owes a total of $1.7 million in legal fees to opponents over the state’s anti-choice laws, according to a statement from Planned Parenthood Arizona.

A group of advocates, including Planned Parenthood Arizona, had sued to block the state law that required doctors to tell patients it was scientifically possible to undo a medication abortion. As the case wound its way through court, the state failed to produce a single credible expert to vouch for that claim, as Rewire‘s Sofia Resnick reported. Last year, a federal judge dismissed the lawsuit after Arizona’s governor signed a bill repealing the measure.

“No one should be forced to hear medically inaccurate information because of politics,” Jodi Liggett, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Arizona, said in a statement. “When politicians use junk science and things go wrong, they hand taxpayers the bill.”

It’s unclear how Arizona will come up with the money to cover the legal expenses. The governor’s office didn’t respond by publication time to a Rewire inquiry by phone and email.

Medication abortion requires that two medications, mifepristone and misoprostol, be taken in the span of a few days to be effective. Only a single published report supports the notion a medication abortion may be reversed when a woman doesn’t take misoprostol and is, instead, injected with a dose of the hormone progesterone. The paper relies on anecdotes from a tiny sample—seven women in total—and was conducted without an ethics oversight review.

Arizona doctors blasted Republicans for backing the state law, calling it “tantamount to quackery.” A systematic review of medical literature found that failing to take the second medication, misoprostol, may be just as likely to forestall an abortion as injecting women with progesterone.

“In the extremely rare case that a patient changes their mind before taking the second pill, watchful waiting and inaction appears to be just as effective as the ‘reversal’ treatment,” wrote Renee Bracey Sherman, a reproductive justice activist, and Dr. Daniel Grossman, director of a reproductive rights research group at the University of California, San Francisco, in a recent opinion piece for the Guardian.

Arizona isn’t the sole state to amass sizable legal fees over anti-choice laws. Texas owes upward of $4 million, Wisconsin is on the hook for $1.6 million, Alaska spent nearly $1 million, and Idaho must pay more than $150,000.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/08/17/arizona-owes-600000-pushing-unproven-abortion-reversal/

 

November 7, 2017

What Pramila Jayapal Thought About Being The Only Woman Debating The Anti-Abortion “Heartbeat” Bill

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
Leave a Comment 

AP/REX/Shutterstock

On Wednesday, the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice held a hearing on a bill that has raised concern and criticism from pro-choice activists. Lawmakers are debating HR 490, which basically determines when it is valid to get an abortion. And yet, the discussion about women having reproductive freedom was dominated by men, a fact that was made clear by Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the only woman invited to speak on the abortion subcommittee.

“As the only woman on the dais, it was incredibly disturbing to see Republican men attempt to strip away my constitutional rights and privacy of women,” Jayapal tells Bustle.

Iowa Rep. Steve King introduced the H.R. 490 bill, known as the Heartbeat Protection Act, in January to demand that the United States “prohibit abortion in cases where a fetal heartbeat is detectable.” The remarkably limited nature of HR 490 has been criticized by observers as a blanket ban on virtually all abortions.

King’s proposal, if it becomes law, would ban abortion procedures as soon as a fetal heartbeat is detected and that can happen as early as six weeks. The six-week marker in the bill would hurt women, as many aren’t even aware that they are pregnant at such an early point. In fact, there are multiple cases wherein a woman is entirely unaware that she is expecting.

“The six-week abortion ban bill is simply unconstitutional,” Jayapal says. “It restricts the constitutionally protected right for women to make decisions about our own bodies, and similar state bills have already been struck down in the courts.”

With HR 490, the GOP is trying to take our reproductive rights away. As the only woman lawmaker in the room, I’m saying  EVER.

The bill heavily goes after physicians. It states there is no leniency or exception even if the pregnancy is a product of rape or incest. The only time the bill makes an exception is if a woman’s life is in danger, though it makes clear that it is only when a “life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury.” It makes clear that the bill does not make an exception for “psychological or emotional conditions.”

If the bill becomes law, physicians who are convicted of violating its rules will be punished with imprisonment. According to the bill, a medical practitioner who performs an abortion on a fetus that has a “detectable heartbeat” could face five years behind bars.

Jayapal has long been a vocal critic of the bill. She cited a Pew Research Center study from January that estimated seven out of 10 Americans were opposed to overturning Roe v. Wade and also mentioned that states like North Dakota and Arkansas with similar bans on abortions were ultimately declared unconstitutional.

“There is no reason to believe that law would face a different fate in the Supreme Court,” Jayapal told the subcommittee.

It is a woman’s right to choose what happens with her body. It’s between her and her doctor—not her, her doctor and the GOP. 

And during the hearing, Jayapal made sure everyone knew she was the only woman representing Americans in the hearing. She wrote on Twitter, “With HR 490, the GOP is trying to take our reproductive rights away. As the only woman lawmaker in the room, I’m saying #NoAbortionBan EVER.”

Jayapal added that she believes the Republican men who were in the room with her debating women’s freedom are hypocrites. She tells Bustle, “Republicans and their witnesses say they are on the side of life, yet they continuously cut CHIP and health care for single mothers, attack programs meant to improve the lives of women and children, and undermine access to critical contraception.”

https://www.bustle.com/p/what-pramila-jayapal-thought-about-being-the-only-woman-debating-the-anti-abortion-heartbeat-bill-3204922

 

November 7, 2017

Notre Dame reverses decision to end no-cost contraceptive coverage

Posted by laurasmith20200 under Abortion Information | Tags: , , |
[9] Comments 

Notre Dame reverses decision to end no-cost contraceptive coverage

© Getty

The University of Notre Dame has reversed its decision to end free contraceptive coverage for employees.

The insurance company used by employees at Notre Dame will keep a plan with contraceptive coverage with no co-pay, US News & World Report reported Tuesday.

“The University of Notre Dame, as a Catholic Institution, follows Catholic teaching about the use of contraceptives and engaged in the recent lawsuit to protect its freedom to act in accord with its principles,” the university said in an email Tuesday.

“Recognizing, however, the plurality of religious and other convictions among its employees, it will not interfere with the provision of contraceptives that will be administered and funded independently of the University.”

The university had previously said it would stop coverage for employees of the university on Jan. 1.

The original decision came after the Trump administration rolled back an ObamaCare requirement that employers include birth control coverage in their health insurance plans.

The Trump administration last month published rules that said any for-profit or nonprofit employer or insurer can stop following the birth control mandate on moral and religious grounds.

ObamaCare mandated that employers offer health insurance that covers birth control without a co-pay, with exemptions for houses of worships and some companies.

Notre Dame reverses decision to end no-cost contraceptive coverage

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »