Category Archive
The following is a list of all entries from the Women’s Health category.
Abortion Coverage: House Versus Senate Bill
What are the differences between abortion coverage in the House versus the Senate bill?
-The House has 25 mentions of abortion versus the Senate’s 21.
-The Senate Bill mandates federally funded abortion coverage, where the House Bill passed the Stupak Amendment, which bans federally subsidized coverage that could ultimately lead to denying abortion coverage in private plans.
-According to Andrea Simoncic of the Examiner, “the Senate bill simply provides abortion funding in a much more direct and honest manner” than the House Bill. Tax dollars will be mandated for abortion coverage in the Senate Bill.
Regardless of which bill passes in the House or the Senate, there have been rumors that President Obama does not support Stupak and could intervene in the final legislation. However, Stupak told Fox News that “They’re not going to take it out. If they do, health care will not move forward.”
Wow. Really? It’s not possible for national health coverage to pass if it includes abortion coverage? I thought we lived in a modern society. But we also live in a society where women pay 48 percent more for health insurance than men. Pregnancy and reproductive health coverage can be denied in insurance plans due to a “pre-existing condition.”
There is a lot of room for reform in the American health care system, but I am willing to wait for nationalizing health care if it does not include reproductive health coverage. If we have waited this long, why not wait a little longer and get it right?
Anti-Stupak Advocators
With a Saturday session of the Senate, a vote on the health care bill is planned for 8 p.m. tonight. Will Stupak pass? If so, this will be a step backwards on health care reform.
Planned Parenthood is leading the anti-Stupak movement with their “Pass Health Care Reform! Stop Stupak!” campaign. Supporters are encouraged to sign an online petition addressed to President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and Speaker Pelosi. The message states: “Women must be able to purchase private or public health insurance that offers comprehensive reproductive health care, including abortion care.”
Female reproductive health coverage should not be banned from private and public insurance plans. This will affect millions of women who already have abortion coverage.
The Students Stop Stupak blog, created by Harvard student activists was created to “ensure that the Stupak amendment doesn’t end up in the final health care bill” and “mobilize college students at Harvard and beyond to start a movement advocating for women’s health care, reproductive rights, etc.”
I commend these students for organizing this group. Our generation is always criticized for not caring. Well, stopping Stupak is an issue that everyone should care about. We cannot allow the status quo to change on abortion coverage.
A good line on the Students Stop Stupak blog is “women’s health care is health care.” Women’s health care coverage in a government plan is just as important, even if that includes abortion. Reproductive health services are a natural health care need to women. Women should not be denied sufficient coverage because of the power of the Catholic Bishops in the House.
Anti-Stupak activism is critical. Please sign the Planned Parenthood petition and visit the Students Stop Stupak website to show your support or follow them on twitter.
UMass Amherst Views on Stupak
Most students I talked to were not aware of the details of the Stupak Amendment, but had heard a rumor of restrictions being passed on abortion. Well, if the vote in the Senate doesn’t change the measure, the rumors will be true: there will be a ban on abortion coverage.
According to sophomore social thought and political economy major Maria Geueke, “A woman should have the same access to resources and be able to afford abortion.” Geueke found the recent legislation “ridiculous.”
Nancy L. Cohen of the Huffington Post also sees Stupak as preposterous. Cohen believes “the main thrust of the measure is to condemn women for being sexually active.” She gives a good break down of why women need reproductive services in her 10 Reasons Why the Stupak-Pitts Amendment Has to Go.
The most telling statistic being “80% of Americans think abortion should be legal in some circumstances.” So if the majority of Americans approve of some abortion rights, than why shouldn’t there be insurance coverage of reproductive services that are essential in some circumstances?
Senior sociology major, Laura Mason said, “I think that in America health care is viewed as a business where as in other countries it is seen as a social right.”
There is a business aspect, but also a strong religious aspect. The Catholic Bishops showed their lobbying force in the House, as well as the Blue Dog Democrats by getting Stupak passed last minute.
“Religion shouldn’t be forced on anyone, everyone should have the right to freedom,” said philosophy senior John Maynes. Maynes sees the legislation as step towards prohibiting Roe vs. Wade.
In Newsweek, reporter Eleanor Clift does not see the legislation as permanent. There is still hope in the Senate bill. Access to abortion coverage needs to improve, not be further restricted.
Health Bill Passes, No Pass for Abortion Coverage
The overall health care reform bill passed 220-to-215, but the restrictive language on abortion coverage in the Stupak Amendment also passed with a 240-to-194 vote with the support of the anti-choice Democrats and the Catholic Bishops.
The Stupak Amendment establishes a ban on government subsidies to pay for “any part of a policy that includes abortion coverage.” This means that tax credits given to lower income families cannot be used towards abortion services in any circumstance. Newly insured women will not be offered insurance plans that cover abortion. Those women with insurance that covers abortion could lose that coverage if employers chose to use the government plan.
In the San Francisco Chronicle, columnist E.J. Dionne Jr. states, “the truth is that even with the Stupak restrictions, health care reform would leave millions of Americans far better off than they are now – including millions of women.” Yes, this is true, but we should not be moving backwards on reproductive service coverage.
Obama somewhat agrees. The President does not want to change the “status quo” on abortion, but he also does not support the use of federal money for abortions. Therefore, there should be no increase of abortion coverage in insurance, but the Stupak Amendment would alter the status quo on abortion coverage and should be revised by Congress.
I hope the final vote on Stupak in the Senate does not pass. With the strong support from anti-choice Democrats, some Republicans, and the Bishops it will be a close call.
Female health is not a priority. It has always been prohibiting reproductive services that gets the most attention. The recent W.H.O. study reports that the majority of women in developing countries do not have sufficient health care coverage. Although the status of women’s health in the U.S. has improved in the last century, reform is still necessary especially in reproductive coverage.
Anti-Abortion Movement Gains Momentum
Recently, a dozen anti-abortion supporters were arrested for protesting outside of Nancy Pelosi’s office. Those arrested were the followers of Randall Terry and Father Norman Weslin, who are prominent anti-choice activists.
Today, one protester outside the Capitol targeted President Obama as a “fascist” that “will force Americans to pay for abortions and for government-provided health care.” This protester was from the group Insurrecta Nex, which follows Terry, who is described as a “militant anti-abortion leader.”
This is not true! First of all, there will be no government dollars going towards abortion and Americans will not be paying more for a public option. The public option will be there, but that does not mean you have to give up your existing coverage.
Also, government measures like Medicaid and Medicare are existing programs that have taken American tax dollars. This is not a new concept.
In the blog I am Emily X, the staff of Planned Parenthood recounted the 40 days of protests by the 40 Days for Life campaign. On the 40th day there were 1,034 protesters spotted outside of Planned Parenthood facilities nationally. Planned Parenthood supporters raised $56,048 against the 40 day protest movement.
Anti-abortionists are making health care reform a negative thing. The point of reforming the health care system is providing health insurance to more people, and that health insurance should cover abortion just like existing private insurance plans.
Stunting Abortion Coverage in Stupak Amendment
Today’s health care reform vote in the House was not good news for pro-choice supporters. There was a last-minute abortion compromise known as the Stupak Amendment, which guarantees that no federal dollars will be used towards abortion coverage.
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops support the amendment that specifies that there will be no abortion coverage in the government insurance plan and this could also go as far as applying to private insurance plans that already cover abortion.
According to Planned Parenthood, “If the bishops and their anti-choice partners in the House succeed, they’ll permanently alter health care in America, even taking away benefits from women that they have today. The bishops want to effectively eliminate abortion coverage in both private plans and the public option.”
This is a serious halt on reforming health care with conservatives stunting existing abortion coverage. The U.S. should not be moving backwards on female health care coverage when the health care bill seeks to improve the current system.
Planned Parenthood is strongly advocating for people not to let this happen, by calling local representatives and tweeting the news on PPact. Please visit the Planned Parenthood Action Center to find out more about the pro-choice campaign.
The Abortion Question Needs an Answer!
The health care debate is going around in circles over the abortion question. Will the health care bill allow federal dollars to be used toward abortion coverage or not? Well, from what the media is reporting–the majority of the House and President Obama say no federal money for abortions.
But the specification in the bill is the matter of debate–there are options for lower income families of providing tax credits that could be used to attain abortion coverage. Wouldn’t that mean government money could be spent towards reproductive services?
According to the AP article Abortion divides House Dems in Health Care Debate, there are two dozen anti-abortion democrats who want to make sure that the bill clearly prohibits federal funding of abortions.
Some believe the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal money being used towards abortions “except in cases of rape and incest or if the mother’s life would be endangered,” would answer the abortion question. Others report that there are discrepancies with the amendment and that it only applies to Medicaid.
On the Life News website, this article gives both sides of the debate over the Hyde Amendment. According to National Right to Life federal legislative director Douglas Johnson and AP, the Hyde Amendment does not apply to the new health care bill.
However, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs claimed that the Hyde Amendment directly prohibits federal funding of abortions. The Life News website believes that Gibbs mislead reporters.
In my opinion, a new amendment should be established where there is no confusion in the language of the amendment. Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not specify if there will be an amendment on abortion, and said the current focus is on “our policy on this legislation.”
Yes, I agree that the health care bill overall and the public option should be the priority, but the issue of abortion cannot be ignored. There is too much controversy in the media not to answer the question: Will women receive abortion coverage or not?
40 Days: An Anti-Abortion Recipe
Planned Parenthood clinics across the nation have seen anti-choice protesters in high volumes due to the 40 Days for Life campaign. This organization sees abortion as “evil,” and their mission is to use protest, prayer and fasting, and constant vigil to put an end to abortions.
The campaign uses the number 40 as symbolism for the 40 days of rain God brought to Noah and Moses’ 40 days on the mountain. The group wants to rid the world of abortion in 40 days, which is promoted in this campaign video.
The message of closing Planned Parenthood facilities is even more promoted on their website that applauds the closing of a Montana clinic, as an answer to their prayers from God.
They have caused quite a stir and Planned Parenthood has created a blog, I am Emily X, in response. Planned Parenthood workers and activists report the experiences of patients who have seen protesters at clinics across America.
One blog post discusses the vulnerability of a patient at an Idaho clinic, who called Planned Parenthood very upset by yelling protesters. As a patient, you are going to Planned Parenthood to receive care that you that you might already feel worried about and to have someone harassing you outside of a facility would make you even more uncomfortable.
In a post from Washington, a patient told a Planned Parenthood staffer, “I would never protest at their church, never.” The staffer said she didn’t identify Planned Parenthood as a “church,” but what the patient had said really struck her. Planned Parenthood is an organization that has the faith and value of providing reproductive rights to women.
Everyone has the right to free speech, but when a woman is labeled as “good” or “evil” for going to Planned Parenthood that is not justified. That is only speculation. A female patient could be going to Planned Parenthood to get a pregnancy test, find out her options, and not to get an abortion.
Women’s Health Groups in Amherst
Amherst is a community full of college students. In this environment, I think it is crucial for young women to be educated on health care issues.
I have learned a lot about the importance of female health by attending some of the events organized at UMass by Vox: Students for Choice. This student government organization promotes reproductive health and rights on campus. In the spring of 2008, I attended a “pharmacy sting” where we went to Walmart to see if they carried emergency contraception, which they did.
In Massachusetts, pharmacies are required to carry emergency contraception, an anomaly in states like Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Dakota that have laws or regulations that deny patients emergency contraception based on the pharmacists’ personal beliefs.
If you are interested in learning more about the importance of female rights, please attend Vox’s meetings on Wednesdays at 5:30 p.m. in the Student Union room 407.
Another group at UMass involved in providing women’s health education and bringing awareness to other issues including race, ethnicity, and oppression is the Everywoman’s Center. There will be a talk on “Women and Cancer in Our Communities: How to Save Your Own Life,” on Tuesday Oct. 20 at 4 p.m. in the Campus Center room 905. Female panelists with professions in health care will discuss the importance of attaining early prevention of cancer and how families should deal with a loved one getting cancer.
The UMass School of Public Health and Health Sciences has a Center for Research and Education in Women’s Health (CREWH). The CREWH seeks to improve the health of women by doing scientific research and informing other colleges and communities on women’s health issues.
In addition to groups affiliated with UMass, the town of Amherst provides Tapestry Health, a health clinic that provides completely confidential and affordable health care to women. This is a good option for female students, who do not want to go to University Health Services.
Does Republican Senator Snowe’s Vote Count?
Senator of Maine Olympia Snowe has recently received frantic press attention because she is the only Republican in the house that voted for Obama’s health care reform bill. According to Reuters, the vote on Tuesday in the Senate Finance Committee was 14-9 in favor of Obama’s plan.
Snowe is a moderate Republican, who has been known to go against the party majority. She also voted for Obama’s economic stimulus bill. This reputation has led some Republicans to question her allegiance to the party, but her views reflect more on local politics and what will benefit the residents of Maine, where there are not many large companies that provide health insurance to employees.
The New York Times gives a variety of opinions on the importance of Snowe’s vote. Some say that Democrats would be able to pass the bill without Republican support and that the vote right now is not final because health reform will be adjusted in the future. Senator and chairmen of the Senate health committee, Tom Harkin, was not too concerned in getting Snowe’s vote, but more concerned about “getting it done right.”
Snowe has been a frequent blog topic across all political views in the blogosphere.
But what are her views on abortion?
Reuters reported that Snowe is disliked by conservative Republicans for her support of legalizing abortion. Recently The New York Times reported that Snowe rejected abortion restrictions, but in the Baucus Bill there will be no use of federal money towards reproductive services. Private insurance companies that choose to cover abortion can continue to do so.
“We want to preserve the status quo on abortion,” said Snowe. So Snowe supports women’s legal right to abortion, but she also does not support a government plan that provides abortion coverage. What about women who cannot afford private insurance for reproductive services?
There is a fear among women’s pro-choice advocates that private insurance companies will drop abortion coverage altogether to save costs in the competitive market that will have a less expensive government plan.
Medi-Gal 