I received the following response from an FDA representative regarding questions about possible budget freezes within the FDA's Office of Women's Health (message from FDA spokeswoman Julie Zawisza, published with permission):
Rachel,
Thanks for your message. I think there may have been some misunderstanding of how FDA proceeds during the 2OO7 Continuing Resolution process by which FDA develops a spending plan that is approved by Congress. We do not have final budget numbers yet for any of our operating components so it is premature to discuss what the final budget may look like.
Recent press reports discussed preliminary results of an internal numbers exercise, leading to inaccurate and premature reporting. We are still finalizing the 2007 spending plan and intend to apply the same approach to the Office of Women's Health as to other components of the Office of the Commissioner, specifically that the 2007 plan is intended to allow our operating components to spend at least at their 2006 level. This will continue to support our strong commitment to the Office of Women's Health and its role.
I have not yet identified the 2006 spending level figures.
The Washington Post reported in its piece, Women's Health Office Funds Cut, that "The administration had requested -- and Congress had budgeted -- $4 million for the office in fiscal 2007, just as they have for several years running. Last week, however, word came down that the FDA intends to withhold $1.2 million of that, apparently for use elsewhere in the agency. Because the remaining $2.8 million has already been spent or allocated for salaries and started projects, the office must effectively halt further operations for the rest of the year, according to a high-level agency official with knowledge of the budget plan, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak publicly." The story also mentions concerns that any budget cuts might be retribution for the OWH's support of science-based decision-making on over-the-counter status for Plan B emergency contraception.
The Kaiser Network has an update
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
HPV Vaccine Discussion on the NewsHour
The NewsHour on PBS aired a segment tonight, "New Study Stirs Debate over Mandatory Cervical Cancer Vaccination." The NewsHour health correspondent, Susan Dentzer addresses a new study of HPV infection rates, the HPV vaccine, and debate over making the vaccine mandatory. A transcript is available, as are audio versions via RealAudio and mp3 download.
The study mentioned above, released today in the Journal of the American Medical Association, reports that 1/3 of American women are infected with HPV by the age of 24, according to this article in the Washington Post. JAMA is providing the full-text of the article, "Prevalence of HPV Infection Among Females in the United States," for free on its website. According to the report, prevalence of HPV infection among women ages 14-19 was 24.5%. Interestingly, the two most frequently detected types of HPV were not those the Gardasil vaccine protects against, but were considered low-risk forms of the virus. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of each type of HPV found except for the greater frequency of those two low-risk forms. According to the study, "Overall, HPV types 6, 11, 16, or 18 were detected in 3.4% of the study participants, corresponding with 3.1 million females with prevalent infection with HPV types included in the quadrivalent HPV vaccine. Few participants (0.10%) had both HPV types 16 and 18 and none had all 4 HPV vaccine types. At least 1 of these 4 HPV types was detected in 6.2% (95% CI, 3.8%-10.3%) of females aged 14 to 19 years."
The study mentioned above, released today in the Journal of the American Medical Association, reports that 1/3 of American women are infected with HPV by the age of 24, according to this article in the Washington Post. JAMA is providing the full-text of the article, "Prevalence of HPV Infection Among Females in the United States," for free on its website. According to the report, prevalence of HPV infection among women ages 14-19 was 24.5%. Interestingly, the two most frequently detected types of HPV were not those the Gardasil vaccine protects against, but were considered low-risk forms of the virus. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of each type of HPV found except for the greater frequency of those two low-risk forms. According to the study, "Overall, HPV types 6, 11, 16, or 18 were detected in 3.4% of the study participants, corresponding with 3.1 million females with prevalent infection with HPV types included in the quadrivalent HPV vaccine. Few participants (0.10%) had both HPV types 16 and 18 and none had all 4 HPV vaccine types. At least 1 of these 4 HPV types was detected in 6.2% (95% CI, 3.8%-10.3%) of females aged 14 to 19 years."
Monday, February 26, 2007
ALIEN!!!
I have an alien inside of my stomach.
She is bursting to come out.
Today, while sitting at the computer I swear I saw a little hand pop out of my belly button and try to type something out to her daddy on the email.
Okay.....Okay...Maybe I'm exaggerating a *little* bit. However, everytime I get to this point in my pregnancies (you know the point where you can SEE your stomach moving) I am reminded of the movie Alien. Especially that part where the woman's body starts to move and then an alien head shoots out of her stomach. I know, it's a lovely picture, but I'm reminded of it nonetheless.
Today was the first time I saw this phenomenon. I was sitting there, typing an email to Chuck, and my stomach moved. I just saw it out of the corner of my eye...and then I saw it again. Since then, I don't think that this little girl has sat still.
While the movement is undoubtedly one of the coolest things about pregnancy, one of my favorite things, it's still a little unnerving to see it happening in your own body.
Last Wednesday, I had a midwife appointment and my second ultrasound. We had to have a second ultrasound because of an inability to see everything last time. This time around, the tech was able to see all internal organs and all parts of the brain. I was even able to see all four chambers of the heart pumping away in there. It was really cool. And I asked, just to make sure, and it is still a girl! The little girl is laying transverse across my belly too, which is probably why I'm not popping out like a basketball and why I'm having such pain in my hips.
I also had to do my glucose test checking for gestational diabetes. This is always something that is rather worrisome to me, considering that diabetes is rampant in my family and my grandfather died from diabetic complications. As of yet, I haven't heard anything back regarding that, so I'm assuming it's a good thing.
I did gain 2 lbs this visit. But, I'm totally a-ok with that. Hell, not pregnant I can gain 2 lbs in 2 days, so 2 lbs in a month isn't too shabby. I'm still down a total of 10 lbs this pregnancy.
And now I start going to the midwife every 2 weeks!!!!! I can't believe I'm already in my third trimester. I feel like this pregnancy is absolutely flying by. I know there are days that I can't wait to end, but for the most part I'm so busy with the boys, Chuck, the house, work, that time is flying! We have finally started working on the baby's room, well we've been doing bits here and there...but it's almost cleaned out and we should be able to start tearing down paneling and drywall this weekend. I can't wait to see it finished :)
It's funny how with each consecutive child you get laxer and laxer with things. At this point in my pregnancy with Zachary, I believe we had the room cleared, the bed set up and things hanging in the closet and wall hangings on the wall...all waiting in anticipation for our bundle of joy. With Luke, we knew we were moving, but I still had things ready for the baby...bottles out, cradle set and ready to go, new car seat for Zachary so Luke could have the infant seat.
Now, with our third child...I'm 11 weeks from having her...and the room isn't even cleared out and we have construction and remodeling to do! I guess I just know a little better now just exactly what's needed and what's important. And having a perfect nursery isn't it.
She is bursting to come out.
Today, while sitting at the computer I swear I saw a little hand pop out of my belly button and try to type something out to her daddy on the email.
Okay.....Okay...Maybe I'm exaggerating a *little* bit. However, everytime I get to this point in my pregnancies (you know the point where you can SEE your stomach moving) I am reminded of the movie Alien. Especially that part where the woman's body starts to move and then an alien head shoots out of her stomach. I know, it's a lovely picture, but I'm reminded of it nonetheless.
Today was the first time I saw this phenomenon. I was sitting there, typing an email to Chuck, and my stomach moved. I just saw it out of the corner of my eye...and then I saw it again. Since then, I don't think that this little girl has sat still.
While the movement is undoubtedly one of the coolest things about pregnancy, one of my favorite things, it's still a little unnerving to see it happening in your own body.
Last Wednesday, I had a midwife appointment and my second ultrasound. We had to have a second ultrasound because of an inability to see everything last time. This time around, the tech was able to see all internal organs and all parts of the brain. I was even able to see all four chambers of the heart pumping away in there. It was really cool. And I asked, just to make sure, and it is still a girl! The little girl is laying transverse across my belly too, which is probably why I'm not popping out like a basketball and why I'm having such pain in my hips.
I also had to do my glucose test checking for gestational diabetes. This is always something that is rather worrisome to me, considering that diabetes is rampant in my family and my grandfather died from diabetic complications. As of yet, I haven't heard anything back regarding that, so I'm assuming it's a good thing.
I did gain 2 lbs this visit. But, I'm totally a-ok with that. Hell, not pregnant I can gain 2 lbs in 2 days, so 2 lbs in a month isn't too shabby. I'm still down a total of 10 lbs this pregnancy.
And now I start going to the midwife every 2 weeks!!!!! I can't believe I'm already in my third trimester. I feel like this pregnancy is absolutely flying by. I know there are days that I can't wait to end, but for the most part I'm so busy with the boys, Chuck, the house, work, that time is flying! We have finally started working on the baby's room, well we've been doing bits here and there...but it's almost cleaned out and we should be able to start tearing down paneling and drywall this weekend. I can't wait to see it finished :)
It's funny how with each consecutive child you get laxer and laxer with things. At this point in my pregnancy with Zachary, I believe we had the room cleared, the bed set up and things hanging in the closet and wall hangings on the wall...all waiting in anticipation for our bundle of joy. With Luke, we knew we were moving, but I still had things ready for the baby...bottles out, cradle set and ready to go, new car seat for Zachary so Luke could have the infant seat.
Now, with our third child...I'm 11 weeks from having her...and the room isn't even cleared out and we have construction and remodeling to do! I guess I just know a little better now just exactly what's needed and what's important. And having a perfect nursery isn't it.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
More Emergency Contraception Research
The current issue of the journal Contraception has two articles on emergency contraception availability and awareness, and the journal Women's Health Issues has an article on California women's knowledge of emergency contraception.
1) Schwarz EB, Reeves MF, Gerbert B, Gonzales R. Knowledge of and perceived access to emergency contraception at two urgent care clinics in California. Contraception. 2007 Mar;75(3):209-13.
For this study, the researchers recruited adult (18-45) English-speaking women from two urgent care clinics in San Francisco from Mar-Jul 2005. They excluded women who were currently pregnant, had had a hysterectomy or tubal ligation, had an IUD in place or a partner who had had a vasectomy, were over 45, or who planned to relocate or did not have a telephone. Women completed a computerized survey while they waited for their appointments. The 10-question survey asked about their knowledge of emergency contraception (EC), which was made available without a prescription in California in 2002. 446 women completed surveys that were analyzed. Younger women (<30) and women who had had a prior abortion were more likely to know that EC is currently available in California. Overall, women scored poorly, averaging only 4 correct answers out of 10.
Only 39% knew that emergency contraception is effective in the 3-5 days after intercourse.
Only 27% knew that EC is very or extremely safe, and only 39% knew it is very or extremely effective at preventing pregnancy.
50% knew that EC poses no risk to future fertility, but only 19% knew it does not cause birth defects or miscarriage.
84% knew that EC offers no protection from sexually transmitted infections.
Only 19% reported a personal or religious objection ot abortion, and only 7% reported a personal or religious objection to EC.
Despite the low levels of knowledge of EC found by this survey, the authors note that their design may have actually overestimated knowledge of EC, as it excluded women who did not speak English, 47% of participants had college degrees, and women with less knowledge of EV may have elected not to complete the survey more frequently than those with some knowledge.
****************************
2) Shacter HE, Gee RE, Long JA. Variation in availability of emergency contraception in pharmacies. Contraception. 2007 Mar;75(3):214-7.
The researchers conducted telelphone surveys of EC availability in Boston, MA, Philadelphia, PA, and Atlanta, GA. At the time of the study, state policy required MA pharmacists to fill all valid prescriptions, GA law allws pharmacists to legally refuse to fill the prescriptions, and PA had no policy regarding pharmacist refusals. A prescription was required for emergency contraception in all three states at the time the calls were made. 1085 pharmacies were included in the analysis: 268 in Boston; 427 in Philadelphia; 390 in Atlanta.
23% of pharmacies could not dispense EC within 24 hours, including 4% in Boston, 23% in Philadelphia, and 35% in Atlanta. 18% of these reporting being willing to but unable to dispense within 24 hours due to not carrying the drug.
Atlanta had the highest rate of refusal to dispense, at 9% (34) of pharmacies.
Large chains (20 or more stores in the city) were least likely to be unable to dispense EC within 24 hours (27%), followed by small chains (4 or fewer stores in the city, 32%), and medium chains (5-20 stores in the city, 46%).
No refusals occurred in Boston, where pharmacists are required to fill valid prescriptions.
****************************
3) Foster DG, Ralph LJ, Arons A, Brindis CD, Harper CC. Trends in knowledge of emergency contraception among women in California, 1999–2004. Womens Health Issues. 2007 Jan-Feb;17(1):22-8.
The authors took 6 years of data from the California Women's Health Survey, an annual telephone survey of ~4,000 rnadomly selected adult women in California. Two questions about emergency contraception were added to the survey in 1999 and were asked of women who had ever had sexual intercourse but had not had a hysterectomy.
In 1999, 48% of women knew there was something they could do in the 3 days after unprotected intercourse to prevent pregnancy; by 2004, 65% of women knew this.
Women who answered "yes" to the first question (about whether something could be done to prevent pregnancy in the 3 days after intercourse) were asked what could be done. 3% in 1999 and 4% in 2004 explicitly named emergency contraception in response. 66% in 1999 and 65% in 2004 referred to the "morning after pill" (indicating that they were aware of EC) or some other correct response such as having an IUD inserted or taking a modified dose of birth control pills.
Incorrect responses included RU-486, abortion, douche, injection, and herbal remedies.
Younger women (<25) and college-educated women were more likely to know about EC in both 1999 and 2004.
Racial/ethnic disparities were found, with Hispanic and South/Southeast Asian women having the lease knowledge of EC, and significant differences in EC knowledge between native and foreign-born Hispanic women.
Foreign-born Hispanic women, women with incomes below the poverty level, and women who did not complete high school had the lowest levels of EC knowledge in 2004.
1) Schwarz EB, Reeves MF, Gerbert B, Gonzales R. Knowledge of and perceived access to emergency contraception at two urgent care clinics in California. Contraception. 2007 Mar;75(3):209-13.
For this study, the researchers recruited adult (18-45) English-speaking women from two urgent care clinics in San Francisco from Mar-Jul 2005. They excluded women who were currently pregnant, had had a hysterectomy or tubal ligation, had an IUD in place or a partner who had had a vasectomy, were over 45, or who planned to relocate or did not have a telephone. Women completed a computerized survey while they waited for their appointments. The 10-question survey asked about their knowledge of emergency contraception (EC), which was made available without a prescription in California in 2002. 446 women completed surveys that were analyzed. Younger women (<30) and women who had had a prior abortion were more likely to know that EC is currently available in California. Overall, women scored poorly, averaging only 4 correct answers out of 10.
Despite the low levels of knowledge of EC found by this survey, the authors note that their design may have actually overestimated knowledge of EC, as it excluded women who did not speak English, 47% of participants had college degrees, and women with less knowledge of EV may have elected not to complete the survey more frequently than those with some knowledge.
****************************
2) Shacter HE, Gee RE, Long JA. Variation in availability of emergency contraception in pharmacies. Contraception. 2007 Mar;75(3):214-7.
The researchers conducted telelphone surveys of EC availability in Boston, MA, Philadelphia, PA, and Atlanta, GA. At the time of the study, state policy required MA pharmacists to fill all valid prescriptions, GA law allws pharmacists to legally refuse to fill the prescriptions, and PA had no policy regarding pharmacist refusals. A prescription was required for emergency contraception in all three states at the time the calls were made. 1085 pharmacies were included in the analysis: 268 in Boston; 427 in Philadelphia; 390 in Atlanta.
****************************
3) Foster DG, Ralph LJ, Arons A, Brindis CD, Harper CC. Trends in knowledge of emergency contraception among women in California, 1999–2004. Womens Health Issues. 2007 Jan-Feb;17(1):22-8.
The authors took 6 years of data from the California Women's Health Survey, an annual telephone survey of ~4,000 rnadomly selected adult women in California. Two questions about emergency contraception were added to the survey in 1999 and were asked of women who had ever had sexual intercourse but had not had a hysterectomy.
Sunday News Roundup - 2/25/07
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Online Gallery of AIDS Posters
The UCLA Lousie M. Darling Biomedical Library History and Special Collections Division has launched its AIDS Posters collection online, which consists of images of and information about posters that were issued by a variety of institutions in numerous countries (including the United States) to educate people about HIV/AIDS. Users may search this digital library by keyword, perform an advanced search for keyword, title, description, creator, country, and/or subject, or browse by country, subject, creator, or title. Users may also register with the site in order to create a virtual collection of saved poster images for later reference. Each image is accompanied by a record with details on the above-listed search fields, as well as the current location of the poster, dimensions, date, subjects, notes, and inscription. Copyright status is also provided to inform how a poster image may be used. The only addition I'd like to see is an option to search/browse by year and decade, which might be useful for examining how this type of material has changed over time. (found via Our Bodies, Our Blog)
Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act
Warning: lengthy post follows.
A bill has been introduced in Tennessee entitled the "Pregnant Women Support Act" [SB2161, HB2146] The bill is essentially a state version of the Pregnant Women Support Act introduced in the federal legislature last year and currently winding its way through committees and such. The national bill was introduced by another Tennessean, Representative Lincoln Davis. The national bill began as an effort to reduce abortion, and the state bill will likely be touted in the same terms.
As Sean Brainsted points out, it's difficult for advocates of reproductive rights to find much in this bill to be strictly against, and it's certainly a more reasonable approach to abortion than Stacey Campfield's monstrosity. However, criticism of the bill is likely to address what it does not include. As has been pointed out with regards to the national bill (posts 1 and 2), this bill does nothing to actually reduce unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Some of the language provides for informing women about how to prevent future pregnancies, which is great, but a bill attempting to reduce abortions might at least pay lip service to well-woman care (when reproductive health education can occur), comprehensive sex education, and access to contraceptives.
The bill in full:
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49; Title 56; Title 63; Title 68 and Title 71, and to enact the “Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act”.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, is amended by inserting Sections 2 through 6 below as a new chapter thereto to be designated as Chapter 59.
SECTION 2. This act shall be known and may be cited as, the “Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act”.
SECTION 3. The department of health is authorized to and shall apply for any available federal grant providing for the collection of data regarding the number of abortions performed in this state, the characteristics of those seeking abortions, the reasons why women choose abortion, or any other information applicable to supporting pregnant women in this state who may be seeking an abortion.
While the number of abortions performed in the state is already collected by the Department of Health, this portion encourages the Department to seek funds to research why women have abortions. It seems reasonable to collect this type of data in order to plan any future prevention programs. This section specifically corresponds to the section of the national bill that would have the Institute of Medicine conduct a study on why women have abortions, to release a report by 1/2010.
SECTION 4. The department of health shall develop a comprehensive informational pamphlet for distribution upon request to Tennessee licensed physicians. Every licensed physician in this state shall provide such pamphlet to any woman to whom the physician provides an abortion or provides information concerning a possible abortion. The pamphlet shall contain: a list of public and private health care services available to women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, whether the women wish to keep their children or place them for adoption; public and private adoption resources available in the state, including but not limited to the surrender of an infant without criminal liability pursuant to § 68-11-255; and public and private services available, pursuant to Title X of the federal Public Health Service Act, to assist women in preventing future pregnancies. The pamphlet shall contain the name, address and telephone number of public and private organizations, health care facilities, or other persons providing these services; provided, that the commissioner of health may promulgate such rules in the commissioner’s discretion as are necessary for any public or private organization, health care facility, or other person to qualify for inclusion in the pamphlet. The department shall make the pamphlet available to physicians by no later than January 1, 2008.
This is a slightly problematic section. I am supportive of women having all possible information on all of their possible options in times of crisis, such as an unplanned pregnancy. The section provides for informational pamphlets on non-abortion-related services to women who ask their healthcare providers about abortion. It might be more appropriate if the pamphlets contained information on all related services and options, including abortion. It might be argued that the pamphlet simply provides an alternative to the information the physician is providing, but physicians frequently provide patients with pamphlets on conditions they have just discussed in the office. If all information were presented, the pamphlet would simply be an information resource for the woman as she weighs her options. As-is, it is specifically positioned to counter the option of abortion, and becomes a persuasive tool rather than a strictly informational one.
Additionally, the Department would provide pamphlets on request, rather than automatically distributing them to the licensed physicians and nurses who are registered with the State. However, the section also requires provision of a pamphlet to any woman asking about a possible abortion. Therefore, if time a woman visited her family physician and received an unexpected pregnancy result, that physician would technically need to have the pamphlets on hand in order to legally have a conversation with the patient about abortion. I hope that logistical concerns such as these will not, in real practice, get between a woman and her physician talking about her health.
SECTION 5. The department of health shall develop a toll-free telephone hotline for pregnant women or other interested parties to obtain information about: public and private health care services available to women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, whether the women wish to keep their children or place them for adoption; public and private adoption
resources available in the state, including but not limited to the surrender of an infant without criminal liability pursuant to § 68-11-255; and public and private services available, pursuant to Title X of the federal Public Health Service Act, to assist women in preventing future pregnancies. The department shall operate the toll-free telephone hotline no fewer than eight (8) hours per day for no fewer than five (5) days per week, during normal business hours, and shall publicize the hotline through the use of media which may include radio, television, newspaper, billboard or other advertisements. The commissioner of health may promulgate such rules, in the commissioner’s discretion, as are necessary for any public or private organization, health care facility, or other person to qualify for inclusion in the information distributed pursuant to the hotline. The department shall make the hotline available by no later than January 1, 2008.
I'm a librarian, I'm all for the dissemination of information, so a hotline suits me just fine. Numerous voluntary health organizations run hotlines to provide information for consumers on their health information needs. I'd like to see a website with directory accompany the hotline - even if it couldn't be accessed by all w omen, it would be accessible to healthcare providers, librarians, and others who may serve in a role that exposes them to health and community service information requests.
SECTION 6.
(a) There is hereby created in the general fund an account to be known as the "Tennessee pregnant women support fund", hereinafter known as "the fund", as a special nonreverting fund. Funds appropriated from the Tennessee pregnant women support fund shall be administered by the department of health to support women and families who are facing unplanned pregnancy.
(b) The department is authorized to solicit gifts, donations, bequests and grants on behalf of the fund from any source and to deposit all moneys received in the fund. The commissioner shall submit to the governor an annual report of all gifts, donations, grants and bequests accepted; the names of the donors; and the respective amounts contributed by each donor.
(c) All moneys received from any source pursuant to subsection (b) shall be credited to the fund. Interest earned on moneys in the fund shall remain in the fund and be credited to it. Any moneys remaining in the fund, including interest thereon, at the end of each fiscal year shall not revert to the general fund but shall remain in the fund. Moneys in the fund shall be used solely for the purposes of carrying out the activities enumerated below:
The question I still have after reading this section is how much money will be allocated to the program from the State budget, and where that money will come from. I don't see anything in this proposal that says, "The State will provide X dollars to establish the fund and support the activities required by this legislation." It does allow the Department of Health to solicit grants and donations to support the programs, but doesn't seem to provide for how to administer the law if there is not enough grant/gift money to carry out the directives.
(1) Purchasing or upgrading ultrasound equipment for the benefit of any public health program or private health provider in this state;
The emphasis on ultrasound equipment is interesting. Healthcare providers who see pregnant women (and women of reproductive age in general) need equipment other than ultrasound machines on a daily basis. Ultrasound equipment is expensive, and if this section benefits legitimate, unbiased clinics who provide services to women, that is a good thing. However, ultrasound machines are also a point of controversy in the reproductive rights movement, as so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" like to add ultrasound services, believing that they can help coerce women into rejecting abortion as an option. See my previous post on "Option Ultrasound," just such an initiative by anti-choice Focus on the Family. Not every woman will want to have an abortion, but to try to convince women to "choose life" based on emotional manipulation is unseemly. The warm-and-fuzzy a woman gets from viewing an ultrasound is in no way going to make the emotional, physical, and financial resources needed for childbearing magically appear. This provision corresponds to a section in the national bill that would allow grants to be made for the purchase of ultrasound equipment.
(2) Creating a separate program within the department to address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking screening against pregnant women and new mothers;
This is important and worthwhile if well-executed, because the statistics on women abused during pregnancy are staggering. Part 2 corresponds to the national bill section providing for states to "obtain funding for a separate program for domsetic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking screening and treatments for pregnant women and new mothers. This would include training health professionals to identify and respond to patients experiencing abuse, and ensuring that services are provided in a "linguistically and culturally relevant manner." $4,000,000 would be authorized for appropriation for each of the fiscal years 2007-2011."" Note that the national bill does something the State bill does not, which is to specifically address the training of providers, a monetary value, and linguistic and cultural appropriateness.
(3) Conducting the campaign outlined in this chapter to increase public awareness of public and private resources available to pregnant women in this state;
Again, regarding Part 3, information is a good thing. This is directly taken from the national bill.
(4) Providing support services for students of institutions of higher education in this state who are pregnant;
(5) Providing funds to allow early childhood education programs to work with pregnant or parenting teens to complete high school and provide job training education; or
Part 4 also corresponds with measures in the national bill, which included disbursement of grants (not to exceed $25K) to public higher education institutions to assist pregnant students who intent to carry their pregnancies to term through on-campus facilities. More specific information is needed in the state bill to address what type of support will be offered and how it will be funded. Part 5 also replicates the national bill. Supporting women's pursuit of primary and higher education is a good goal, as it wasn't so long ago that pregnant women were automatically expelled from schools.
(6) Providing education on the health needs of infants to teenage or first time mothers through free home visits by registered nurses.
Part 6 is a laudable objective, and there are already agencies in Tennessee providing this kind of service, who I hope would benefit from funding under this section. This provision appears in the national bill, although the national bill also provided for breastfeeding education through WIC.
(d) The department shall establish an application process and related procedures for community health centers, migrant health centers, homeless health centers, public-housing centers, or any other public or private entity seeking grants from the fund. A grant may be made only if an application for the grant is submitted to the department in such manner as specified by the department pursuant to rule.
This is just administrative, so just needs to be done well. The process needs to be done in a way that is not so burdensome to the already stretched resources of public agencies and healthcare providers that it becomes a barrier to funding and implementing services.
SECTION 7. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 56, Chapter 7, Part 23, is amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any individual, franchise, blanket, or group health insurance policy, medical service plan contract, hospital service corporation contract, hospital and medical service corporation contract,
fraternal benefit society, health maintenance organization, preferred provider organization, or managed care organization which provides hospital, surgical, or medical expense insurance shall not deny coverage under any such policy, contract, or plan for obstetrical services to a pregnant woman insured on the basis that the pregnancy was a pre-existing condition if such plan otherwise provides coverage for obstetrical services for insureds who become pregnant after enrollment in such policy, contract or plan.
(b) The provisions of this section are applicable to all health benefit policies, programs, or contracts which are offered by commercial insurance companies, nonprofit insurance companies, health maintenance organizations, preferred provider organizations, and managed care organizations, and which are entered into, delivered, issued for delivery, amended, or renewed after January 1, 2008.
(c) Reimbursement for obstetrical services for insureds who are pregnant at the time of their enrollment shall be determined according to the same formula by which charges are developed for obstetrical services for other insureds. Such coverage shall have durational limits, dollar limits, deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance factors that are no less favorable than for other types of obstetrical services generally.
(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit any insurer from providing medical benefits greater than or more favorable to the insured than the benefits established pursuant to this section.
(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to short term travel policies, short term nonrenewable policies of not more than six (6) months’ duration, accident only policies, limited or specific disease policies, contracts designed for issuance to
persons eligible for coverage under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act, known as Medicare, or any other similar coverage under state or governmental plans, including the TennCare and Medicaid programs.
I'm not seeing a corresponding portion in the national legislation, but I seem to recall another federal bill that addressed this topic (I'm unsure of the status). It would essentially prevent insurors from denying care to pregnant women, which is a good thing.
SECTION 8. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, Chapter 5, Part 5, is amended by inserting the following as a new, appropriately designated section thereto: Any person who offers or provides to a pregnant woman a testing or screening service to detect genetic disorders in that woman’s fetus shall inform the woman in a medically and statistically accurate manner of the likelihood that a positive result of such test or screen might be a false positive. For a person who is a licensed physician or osteopathic physician in this state, a violation of this section may be considered a violation of the practice act governing that person pursuant to title 63, chapter 6 or title 63, chapter 9, respectively. In addition, a violation of this section may be considered a violation of the licensure requirements governing any facility licensed by the department pursuant to this title where the testing or screening service was provided.
This is similar to but more limited than the national bill, which would also provide for peer-support programs, a phone hotline and website for patients, a registry of families willing to adopt newborns with genetic disorders, a clearinghouse of information on these conditions, and education programs for healthcare providers. Information on the false positive rates of these tests, as is information on false negatives, which should seemingly also be included.
SECTION 9. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-11-255, is amended by deleting subsection (a)(1) thereof and by substituting instead the following: (1) “Facility” means any hospital as defined by § 68-11-201, birthing center as defined by § 68-11-201, community health clinic, outpatient “walk-in” clinic, local department of health clinic, local office of the department of human services, or local fire department or police station.
SECTION 10. The commissioner of health is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate the purposes of this act. All such rules and regulations shall be promulgated in accordance with the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 5.
SECTION 11. This act shall take effect July 1, 2007, the public welfare requiring it.
As stated in my previous post on the national legislation, I do think this bill does some very worthwhile things, and at least partially addresses the old argument that if you want to reduce abortions, you have to make it easier for women to have children and support them after birth. On the other hand, the folks involved with tthe national bill have proposed it as a means to reduce abortion, and I don't see a single thing in it about comprehensive sex education (big surprise) or contraceptives. There is nothing in here that addresses preventing pregnancy in the first place, except when a woman has already experienced an unplanned pregnancy. Also, I think it's good if more women are referred to appropriate community agencies, but I don't see a specific increase in funding for existing providers. If they suddenly become swamped with women, will they be able to afford it, and will women receive good service? I also don't see much that truly makes it easier for women to afford to have a baby, because there isn't a lot of substantial funding increase for prenatal care, the actual birth, or all the expenses that come with children (especially after the first year covered by the home visits, which are educational rather than medical). Finally, this legislation could be read as an attempt to push women into carrying a pregnancy to term and giving up the child for adoption, while it does not in any way address the psychological consequences or provide post-surrender counseling for these women. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
A bill has been introduced in Tennessee entitled the "Pregnant Women Support Act" [SB2161, HB2146] The bill is essentially a state version of the Pregnant Women Support Act introduced in the federal legislature last year and currently winding its way through committees and such. The national bill was introduced by another Tennessean, Representative Lincoln Davis. The national bill began as an effort to reduce abortion, and the state bill will likely be touted in the same terms.
As Sean Brainsted points out, it's difficult for advocates of reproductive rights to find much in this bill to be strictly against, and it's certainly a more reasonable approach to abortion than Stacey Campfield's monstrosity. However, criticism of the bill is likely to address what it does not include. As has been pointed out with regards to the national bill (posts 1 and 2), this bill does nothing to actually reduce unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Some of the language provides for informing women about how to prevent future pregnancies, which is great, but a bill attempting to reduce abortions might at least pay lip service to well-woman care (when reproductive health education can occur), comprehensive sex education, and access to contraceptives.
The bill in full:
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49; Title 56; Title 63; Title 68 and Title 71, and to enact the “Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act”.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, is amended by inserting Sections 2 through 6 below as a new chapter thereto to be designated as Chapter 59.
SECTION 2. This act shall be known and may be cited as, the “Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act”.
SECTION 3. The department of health is authorized to and shall apply for any available federal grant providing for the collection of data regarding the number of abortions performed in this state, the characteristics of those seeking abortions, the reasons why women choose abortion, or any other information applicable to supporting pregnant women in this state who may be seeking an abortion.
While the number of abortions performed in the state is already collected by the Department of Health, this portion encourages the Department to seek funds to research why women have abortions. It seems reasonable to collect this type of data in order to plan any future prevention programs. This section specifically corresponds to the section of the national bill that would have the Institute of Medicine conduct a study on why women have abortions, to release a report by 1/2010.
SECTION 4. The department of health shall develop a comprehensive informational pamphlet for distribution upon request to Tennessee licensed physicians. Every licensed physician in this state shall provide such pamphlet to any woman to whom the physician provides an abortion or provides information concerning a possible abortion. The pamphlet shall contain: a list of public and private health care services available to women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, whether the women wish to keep their children or place them for adoption; public and private adoption resources available in the state, including but not limited to the surrender of an infant without criminal liability pursuant to § 68-11-255; and public and private services available, pursuant to Title X of the federal Public Health Service Act, to assist women in preventing future pregnancies. The pamphlet shall contain the name, address and telephone number of public and private organizations, health care facilities, or other persons providing these services; provided, that the commissioner of health may promulgate such rules in the commissioner’s discretion as are necessary for any public or private organization, health care facility, or other person to qualify for inclusion in the pamphlet. The department shall make the pamphlet available to physicians by no later than January 1, 2008.
This is a slightly problematic section. I am supportive of women having all possible information on all of their possible options in times of crisis, such as an unplanned pregnancy. The section provides for informational pamphlets on non-abortion-related services to women who ask their healthcare providers about abortion. It might be more appropriate if the pamphlets contained information on all related services and options, including abortion. It might be argued that the pamphlet simply provides an alternative to the information the physician is providing, but physicians frequently provide patients with pamphlets on conditions they have just discussed in the office. If all information were presented, the pamphlet would simply be an information resource for the woman as she weighs her options. As-is, it is specifically positioned to counter the option of abortion, and becomes a persuasive tool rather than a strictly informational one.
Additionally, the Department would provide pamphlets on request, rather than automatically distributing them to the licensed physicians and nurses who are registered with the State. However, the section also requires provision of a pamphlet to any woman asking about a possible abortion. Therefore, if time a woman visited her family physician and received an unexpected pregnancy result, that physician would technically need to have the pamphlets on hand in order to legally have a conversation with the patient about abortion. I hope that logistical concerns such as these will not, in real practice, get between a woman and her physician talking about her health.
SECTION 5. The department of health shall develop a toll-free telephone hotline for pregnant women or other interested parties to obtain information about: public and private health care services available to women during pregnancy and after the birth of a child, whether the women wish to keep their children or place them for adoption; public and private adoption
resources available in the state, including but not limited to the surrender of an infant without criminal liability pursuant to § 68-11-255; and public and private services available, pursuant to Title X of the federal Public Health Service Act, to assist women in preventing future pregnancies. The department shall operate the toll-free telephone hotline no fewer than eight (8) hours per day for no fewer than five (5) days per week, during normal business hours, and shall publicize the hotline through the use of media which may include radio, television, newspaper, billboard or other advertisements. The commissioner of health may promulgate such rules, in the commissioner’s discretion, as are necessary for any public or private organization, health care facility, or other person to qualify for inclusion in the information distributed pursuant to the hotline. The department shall make the hotline available by no later than January 1, 2008.
I'm a librarian, I'm all for the dissemination of information, so a hotline suits me just fine. Numerous voluntary health organizations run hotlines to provide information for consumers on their health information needs. I'd like to see a website with directory accompany the hotline - even if it couldn't be accessed by all w omen, it would be accessible to healthcare providers, librarians, and others who may serve in a role that exposes them to health and community service information requests.
SECTION 6.
(a) There is hereby created in the general fund an account to be known as the "Tennessee pregnant women support fund", hereinafter known as "the fund", as a special nonreverting fund. Funds appropriated from the Tennessee pregnant women support fund shall be administered by the department of health to support women and families who are facing unplanned pregnancy.
(b) The department is authorized to solicit gifts, donations, bequests and grants on behalf of the fund from any source and to deposit all moneys received in the fund. The commissioner shall submit to the governor an annual report of all gifts, donations, grants and bequests accepted; the names of the donors; and the respective amounts contributed by each donor.
(c) All moneys received from any source pursuant to subsection (b) shall be credited to the fund. Interest earned on moneys in the fund shall remain in the fund and be credited to it. Any moneys remaining in the fund, including interest thereon, at the end of each fiscal year shall not revert to the general fund but shall remain in the fund. Moneys in the fund shall be used solely for the purposes of carrying out the activities enumerated below:
The question I still have after reading this section is how much money will be allocated to the program from the State budget, and where that money will come from. I don't see anything in this proposal that says, "The State will provide X dollars to establish the fund and support the activities required by this legislation." It does allow the Department of Health to solicit grants and donations to support the programs, but doesn't seem to provide for how to administer the law if there is not enough grant/gift money to carry out the directives.
(1) Purchasing or upgrading ultrasound equipment for the benefit of any public health program or private health provider in this state;
The emphasis on ultrasound equipment is interesting. Healthcare providers who see pregnant women (and women of reproductive age in general) need equipment other than ultrasound machines on a daily basis. Ultrasound equipment is expensive, and if this section benefits legitimate, unbiased clinics who provide services to women, that is a good thing. However, ultrasound machines are also a point of controversy in the reproductive rights movement, as so-called "crisis pregnancy centers" like to add ultrasound services, believing that they can help coerce women into rejecting abortion as an option. See my previous post on "Option Ultrasound," just such an initiative by anti-choice Focus on the Family. Not every woman will want to have an abortion, but to try to convince women to "choose life" based on emotional manipulation is unseemly. The warm-and-fuzzy a woman gets from viewing an ultrasound is in no way going to make the emotional, physical, and financial resources needed for childbearing magically appear. This provision corresponds to a section in the national bill that would allow grants to be made for the purchase of ultrasound equipment.
(2) Creating a separate program within the department to address domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking screening against pregnant women and new mothers;
This is important and worthwhile if well-executed, because the statistics on women abused during pregnancy are staggering. Part 2 corresponds to the national bill section providing for states to "obtain funding for a separate program for domsetic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking screening and treatments for pregnant women and new mothers. This would include training health professionals to identify and respond to patients experiencing abuse, and ensuring that services are provided in a "linguistically and culturally relevant manner." $4,000,000 would be authorized for appropriation for each of the fiscal years 2007-2011."" Note that the national bill does something the State bill does not, which is to specifically address the training of providers, a monetary value, and linguistic and cultural appropriateness.
(3) Conducting the campaign outlined in this chapter to increase public awareness of public and private resources available to pregnant women in this state;
Again, regarding Part 3, information is a good thing. This is directly taken from the national bill.
(4) Providing support services for students of institutions of higher education in this state who are pregnant;
(5) Providing funds to allow early childhood education programs to work with pregnant or parenting teens to complete high school and provide job training education; or
Part 4 also corresponds with measures in the national bill, which included disbursement of grants (not to exceed $25K) to public higher education institutions to assist pregnant students who intent to carry their pregnancies to term through on-campus facilities. More specific information is needed in the state bill to address what type of support will be offered and how it will be funded. Part 5 also replicates the national bill. Supporting women's pursuit of primary and higher education is a good goal, as it wasn't so long ago that pregnant women were automatically expelled from schools.
(6) Providing education on the health needs of infants to teenage or first time mothers through free home visits by registered nurses.
Part 6 is a laudable objective, and there are already agencies in Tennessee providing this kind of service, who I hope would benefit from funding under this section. This provision appears in the national bill, although the national bill also provided for breastfeeding education through WIC.
(d) The department shall establish an application process and related procedures for community health centers, migrant health centers, homeless health centers, public-housing centers, or any other public or private entity seeking grants from the fund. A grant may be made only if an application for the grant is submitted to the department in such manner as specified by the department pursuant to rule.
This is just administrative, so just needs to be done well. The process needs to be done in a way that is not so burdensome to the already stretched resources of public agencies and healthcare providers that it becomes a barrier to funding and implementing services.
SECTION 7. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 56, Chapter 7, Part 23, is amended by adding the following language as a new, appropriately designated section:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any individual, franchise, blanket, or group health insurance policy, medical service plan contract, hospital service corporation contract, hospital and medical service corporation contract,
fraternal benefit society, health maintenance organization, preferred provider organization, or managed care organization which provides hospital, surgical, or medical expense insurance shall not deny coverage under any such policy, contract, or plan for obstetrical services to a pregnant woman insured on the basis that the pregnancy was a pre-existing condition if such plan otherwise provides coverage for obstetrical services for insureds who become pregnant after enrollment in such policy, contract or plan.
(b) The provisions of this section are applicable to all health benefit policies, programs, or contracts which are offered by commercial insurance companies, nonprofit insurance companies, health maintenance organizations, preferred provider organizations, and managed care organizations, and which are entered into, delivered, issued for delivery, amended, or renewed after January 1, 2008.
(c) Reimbursement for obstetrical services for insureds who are pregnant at the time of their enrollment shall be determined according to the same formula by which charges are developed for obstetrical services for other insureds. Such coverage shall have durational limits, dollar limits, deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance factors that are no less favorable than for other types of obstetrical services generally.
(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit any insurer from providing medical benefits greater than or more favorable to the insured than the benefits established pursuant to this section.
(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to short term travel policies, short term nonrenewable policies of not more than six (6) months’ duration, accident only policies, limited or specific disease policies, contracts designed for issuance to
persons eligible for coverage under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act, known as Medicare, or any other similar coverage under state or governmental plans, including the TennCare and Medicaid programs.
I'm not seeing a corresponding portion in the national legislation, but I seem to recall another federal bill that addressed this topic (I'm unsure of the status). It would essentially prevent insurors from denying care to pregnant women, which is a good thing.
SECTION 8. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, Chapter 5, Part 5, is amended by inserting the following as a new, appropriately designated section thereto: Any person who offers or provides to a pregnant woman a testing or screening service to detect genetic disorders in that woman’s fetus shall inform the woman in a medically and statistically accurate manner of the likelihood that a positive result of such test or screen might be a false positive. For a person who is a licensed physician or osteopathic physician in this state, a violation of this section may be considered a violation of the practice act governing that person pursuant to title 63, chapter 6 or title 63, chapter 9, respectively. In addition, a violation of this section may be considered a violation of the licensure requirements governing any facility licensed by the department pursuant to this title where the testing or screening service was provided.
This is similar to but more limited than the national bill, which would also provide for peer-support programs, a phone hotline and website for patients, a registry of families willing to adopt newborns with genetic disorders, a clearinghouse of information on these conditions, and education programs for healthcare providers. Information on the false positive rates of these tests, as is information on false negatives, which should seemingly also be included.
SECTION 9. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 68-11-255, is amended by deleting subsection (a)(1) thereof and by substituting instead the following: (1) “Facility” means any hospital as defined by § 68-11-201, birthing center as defined by § 68-11-201, community health clinic, outpatient “walk-in” clinic, local department of health clinic, local office of the department of human services, or local fire department or police station.
SECTION 10. The commissioner of health is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate the purposes of this act. All such rules and regulations shall be promulgated in accordance with the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 5.
SECTION 11. This act shall take effect July 1, 2007, the public welfare requiring it.
As stated in my previous post on the national legislation, I do think this bill does some very worthwhile things, and at least partially addresses the old argument that if you want to reduce abortions, you have to make it easier for women to have children and support them after birth. On the other hand, the folks involved with tthe national bill have proposed it as a means to reduce abortion, and I don't see a single thing in it about comprehensive sex education (big surprise) or contraceptives. There is nothing in here that addresses preventing pregnancy in the first place, except when a woman has already experienced an unplanned pregnancy. Also, I think it's good if more women are referred to appropriate community agencies, but I don't see a specific increase in funding for existing providers. If they suddenly become swamped with women, will they be able to afford it, and will women receive good service? I also don't see much that truly makes it easier for women to afford to have a baby, because there isn't a lot of substantial funding increase for prenatal care, the actual birth, or all the expenses that come with children (especially after the first year covered by the home visits, which are educational rather than medical). Finally, this legislation could be read as an attempt to push women into carrying a pregnancy to term and giving up the child for adoption, while it does not in any way address the psychological consequences or provide post-surrender counseling for these women. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
NARAL Urges Action on Campfield Bill
Stacey Campfield's proposed legislation to issue death certificates for abortion has come to the attention of NARAL Pro-Choice America, which has an online form set up for Tennessans to send a letter to their Representative and State Senator. The text of the letter is as follows, although you can personalize it as desired:
As your constituent, I'm writing to ask you to oppose HB 982, which would require a death certificate be filed for every abortion in Tennessee.
Women who live in Tennessee already face an uphill battle when it comes to their reproductive rights. Anti-choice legislators in recent years have passed biased counseling and mandatory delay requirements, mandatory parental consent rules, targeted regulations against abortion providers, and an unconstitutional ban on abortion as early as 12 weeks in pregnancy.
This bill is not only unnecessary, it is an assault on women's dignity and privacy. Tennessee's Office of Vital Records already keeps track of the number of abortions in the state, but these records keep the women's identities private.
If passed, death certificates would include personal and identifying information - including full name and mailing address - that would become public record.
Women in Tennessee deserve their constitutionally protected right to privacy when they make their personal reproductive decisions. Please help defeat this dangerous bill by voting "no" on HB 982.
Visit the action center and send your letter.
Campfield, who previously released a set of irrelevant questions in an attempt to deflect criticism of the bill, but claims he doesn't have time to respond to all of the questions he's being asked, has time to leave at least 10 comments like this on another right-wing Tennessee blog. He's harrassing a local reporter to get the facts (if they exist) related to a different, non-legislative story:
Well WKRN it sounds like you have been called out. It is put up or shut up time. Terry has said she will release to MSM (I would say you qualify) But I would think the exchange would be a story on the TV news possibly with credit given where it is due. It has been said a good reporter will dig for the story. I don’t think for this story much digging will be needed. Will you still present the facts on the news if it hurts your agenda or will you cop out?
Will you step up or will we get more snarky comments? I would say it is news worthy if it is true. Are you scared she might be right and have the facts? Why not make the deal and see. In poker if you think the other person is bluffing you put you money on the table and call. People turn over the cards and one person is right. I don’t see the money…..
Make up your mind. Stick with one dodge. You will look less foolish
Given that Campfield is either lying about what his bill would do or simply doesn't understand the implications, and has repeatedly ignored attempts to present factual arguments and ask legitimate questions about the bill, his comments would be laughably ironic if they didn't demonstrate that Campfield is only interested in the free flow of information when it suits his agenda.
As your constituent, I'm writing to ask you to oppose HB 982, which would require a death certificate be filed for every abortion in Tennessee.
Women who live in Tennessee already face an uphill battle when it comes to their reproductive rights. Anti-choice legislators in recent years have passed biased counseling and mandatory delay requirements, mandatory parental consent rules, targeted regulations against abortion providers, and an unconstitutional ban on abortion as early as 12 weeks in pregnancy.
This bill is not only unnecessary, it is an assault on women's dignity and privacy. Tennessee's Office of Vital Records already keeps track of the number of abortions in the state, but these records keep the women's identities private.
If passed, death certificates would include personal and identifying information - including full name and mailing address - that would become public record.
Women in Tennessee deserve their constitutionally protected right to privacy when they make their personal reproductive decisions. Please help defeat this dangerous bill by voting "no" on HB 982.
Visit the action center and send your letter.
Campfield, who previously released a set of irrelevant questions in an attempt to deflect criticism of the bill, but claims he doesn't have time to respond to all of the questions he's being asked, has time to leave at least 10 comments like this on another right-wing Tennessee blog. He's harrassing a local reporter to get the facts (if they exist) related to a different, non-legislative story:
Well WKRN it sounds like you have been called out. It is put up or shut up time. Terry has said she will release to MSM (I would say you qualify) But I would think the exchange would be a story on the TV news possibly with credit given where it is due. It has been said a good reporter will dig for the story. I don’t think for this story much digging will be needed. Will you still present the facts on the news if it hurts your agenda or will you cop out?
Will you step up or will we get more snarky comments? I would say it is news worthy if it is true. Are you scared she might be right and have the facts? Why not make the deal and see. In poker if you think the other person is bluffing you put you money on the table and call. People turn over the cards and one person is right. I don’t see the money…..
Make up your mind. Stick with one dodge. You will look less foolish
Given that Campfield is either lying about what his bill would do or simply doesn't understand the implications, and has repeatedly ignored attempts to present factual arguments and ask legitimate questions about the bill, his comments would be laughably ironic if they didn't demonstrate that Campfield is only interested in the free flow of information when it suits his agenda.
Friday, February 23, 2007
In the Hopper
There are a few posts in the works, but it has been a crazy week and I want to take time to do the topics justice. Coming this weekend:
-Two new studies on emergency contraception availability and knowledge
-The Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act
-The APA and sexualization of girls (maybe)
-Any truth to a breast cancer myth?
-Rhythm method as effective as the pill? - a new study
-Women + fish + babies + mercury
-Your Saturday news roundup
-Two new studies on emergency contraception availability and knowledge
-The Tennessee Pregnant Women Support Act
-The APA and sexualization of girls (maybe)
-Any truth to a breast cancer myth?
-Rhythm method as effective as the pill? - a new study
-Women + fish + babies + mercury
-Your Saturday news roundup
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
If I'm In a Carnival, Do I Get a Costume?
The 32nd Carnival of Feminists is up at Bumblebee Sweet Potato, and the post about Rep. Stacey Campfield's proposed legislation to issue death certificates for abortion got a nod. Check it out for links to discussion of the Edwards blogger flap, policy issues, and other topics.
Merck to Stop Lobbying for Mandatory HPV Vaccines
In today's New York Times, "Merck to Halt Lobbying for Vaccine for Girls." The company has been criticized for its efforts to push state legislation that would make the HPV vaccine mandatory for schoolgirls. According to the piece, "The company said it made the decision after realizing that its lobbying campaign had fueled objections across the country that could undermine adoption of the vaccine." The company declined to provide information on how much money it has already spent lobbying for mandatory HPV vaccination.
Read more
Read more
Adventures in Blood Donation
This post is not for the squeamish. *evil grin* I'm sure my buddy Ceeelcee will love it. I went for a blood donation this morning. I do this as often as possible/I remember, and this week the workplace is competing with another Big University in Tennessee to collect the most blood. I had an appointment, I quickly scanned the information sheet, signed in, and waited my turn for processing. I was taken back in less than 2 minutes, and checked in by a nice woman who actually told me my BP, pulse rate, temperature, and iron level as she measured them. So far, so good, and a big improvement over previous experiences.
Next it was time to wait in the glorified lawn chair to start the donation. I waited, and waited a little more, but took the time to read the latest issue of MLA News. There was a little wiggling involved with getting the giant needle properly placed, but this is not terribly uncommon. Then we just tick down the 4-5 minutes it takes to fill the bag, and wait for the attendant to come over to collect the tubes of blood for testing and disconnect everything. No fuss, no muss.
When the Red Cross worker attempted to set up for collecting the tubes of blood, we had an, um, equipment failure. The tip snapped and blood spurted everywhere, like a low-budget horror flick. "Blood fountain" would not be an inappropriate description. I, of course, could not look away. Neither could the lady in the next chair, who I think was a little disturbed. My first reaction was to giggle (sick, I know), and my first thought was, "I wish I had my camera so I could blog this." Ultimately, blood had to be cleaned from my arm, the floor, the attendant, and the arm tray, and the attendant had to change into a clean lab coat. Multiple sets of gloves were gone through. Meanwhile, I had to lift and move my arm so the pools of my blood could be cleaned up, causing stress on the needle (still connected to the tubing and bag), which wiggled around.
So, what of collecting the tubes of blood? Did you know there are 5-6 of these? I had never noticed, because they're usually below the chair and out of site. A supervisor came over to consult, and determined that the only way to collect them would be a "second VP." At first I heard "second BP," which made no sense. No, second VP, for venipuncture. I had to be stuck in the other arm in order to collect the tubes.
I want to say that the Red Cross folks were nothing but professional, and this was more equipment failure than human error. I'll still donate in the future, I just wanted to share my morning of gore with you nice people. I hope we kick Other Big University's behind.
Photo by Yogi and used under a Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike license.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Ever have one of those days?
Where you are looking forward to something so much that you are actually on time to the function? (Well, maybe that's just my life. I'm always 20 minutes late. I'll be late to my own damn funeral).
But I was ON TIME this morning. With 2 kids in clothes in tow.
And then...NOTHING. Complete and utter disappointment.
Zachary was supposed to be evaluated this morning and the counselor called in sick. So now we have to reschedule the appointment in probably another 2 weeks. *sigh* I seriously almost started crying. (Damn pregnancy hormones). But I was really looking forward to making some kind of progress with this. At least getting something started and on the way with this child.
It's probably a blessing in disguise though because Miss Pam (his teacher) said that he was so good today! And he was wonderful this afternoon...listened to directions and followed through with them. If you miscount the mishap of his mattress ending up off the bed and onto the floor, today was the best day in quite some time. So, I guess it's okay that she didn't come. She needs to see the kids' BAD days :)
But I was ON TIME this morning. With 2 kids in clothes in tow.
And then...NOTHING. Complete and utter disappointment.
Zachary was supposed to be evaluated this morning and the counselor called in sick. So now we have to reschedule the appointment in probably another 2 weeks. *sigh* I seriously almost started crying. (Damn pregnancy hormones). But I was really looking forward to making some kind of progress with this. At least getting something started and on the way with this child.
It's probably a blessing in disguise though because Miss Pam (his teacher) said that he was so good today! And he was wonderful this afternoon...listened to directions and followed through with them. If you miscount the mishap of his mattress ending up off the bed and onto the floor, today was the best day in quite some time. So, I guess it's okay that she didn't come. She needs to see the kids' BAD days :)
New Guidelines for Women's Heart Health
The American Heart Association has released an updated 2007 version of its Evidence-Based Guidelines for Cardiovascular Disease in Women Prevention emphasizing a more lifetime-oriented approach to heart disease prevention. According to an AHA press release, major highlights are:
[Note: "CVD" refers to cardiovascular, or heart, disease]
Recommended lifestyle changes to help manage blood pressure include weight control, increased physical activity, alcohol moderation, sodium restriction, and an emphasis on eating fresh fruits, vegetables and low-fat dairy products.
Besides advising women to quit smoking, the 2007 guidelines recommend counseling, nicotine replacement or other forms of smoking cessation therapy.
Physical activity recommendations for women who need to lose weight or sustain weight loss have been added – minimum of 60–-90 minutes of moderate-intensity activity (e.g., brisk walking) on most, and preferably all, days of the week.
The guidelines now encourage all women to reduce saturated fats intake to less than 7 percent of calories if possible.
Specific guidance on omega-3 fatty acid intake and supplementation recommends eating oily fish at least twice a week, and consider taking a capsule supplement of 850–1000 mg of EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) in women with heart disease, two to four grams for women with high triglycerides.
Hormone replacement therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are not recommended to prevent heart disease in women.
Antioxidant supplements (such as vitamin E, C and beta-carotene) should not be used for primary or secondary prevention of CVD.
Folic acid should not be used to prevent CVD – a change from the 2004 guidelines that did recommend it be considered for use in certain high-risk women.
Routine low dose aspirin therapy may be considered in women age 65 or older regardless of CVD risk status, if benefits are likely to outweigh other risks. (Previous guidelines did not recommend aspirin in lower risk or healthy women.)
The upper dosage of aspirin for high-risk women increases to 325 mg per day rather than 162 mg. This brings the women’s guidelines up to date with other recently published guidelines.
The complete guideline will be published in the journal Circulation.
[Note: "CVD" refers to cardiovascular, or heart, disease]
The complete guideline will be published in the journal Circulation.
PG-13 Players Needs Actors
Planned Parenthood of Middle & East Tennessee is looking for teen actors to join its Teen Theatre Troupe and Peer Education Group, the PG-13 Players, a peer education theatre troupe that develops and performs skits on various teen issues such as teen pregnancy, depression, dating violence, etc. Participants must be entering 9th-12th grades in the 2007/08 school year. Auditions are by appointment only on the evenings of March 13th, 14th, and 20th. Contact Kayce Matthews at 345-0952 ext. 218.
From the PPMET website:
The PG-13 Players program combines peer education with theatre to help young people deal with teen issues. Cast members, about 15 per year, are high school teens from throughout the Nashville area.
Each summer, the PG-13 Players receive intensive training in both dramatic skills and teen-related issues. They hear from community experts on more than 15 topics, including HIV/STDs, refusal skills, communication, dating violence, eating disorders, and healthy relationships. The peer educators use this information to develop skits which bring teen issues to life.
The goal of the PG-13 Players is not to give out easy answers, but to enable teens to struggle with the realities of teen life, rehearsing the skills they need to cope with difficult situations.
The Players perform throughout the school year at schools, religious organizations, and youth-serving agencies. During the performance, the situations presented are left unresolved, leaving characters facing tough decisions. After each skit, the actors remain in character for discussion with the audience. Audience members talk to the characters as they struggle with their dilemmas. These conversations with the characters enable young audience members to rehearse decision-making and communication skills, thereby taking the education to a deeper, more personalized level.
The PG-13 Players is supported through private contributions, and grants from:
* The National Council of Jewish Women, Nashville Section
* United Way of Metropolitan Nashville
* Tennessee Department of Health
Each PG-13 Players performance lasts from 45 to 90 minutes according to your group's needs.
Performances are available in the Nashville area only.
From the PPMET website:
The PG-13 Players program combines peer education with theatre to help young people deal with teen issues. Cast members, about 15 per year, are high school teens from throughout the Nashville area.
Each summer, the PG-13 Players receive intensive training in both dramatic skills and teen-related issues. They hear from community experts on more than 15 topics, including HIV/STDs, refusal skills, communication, dating violence, eating disorders, and healthy relationships. The peer educators use this information to develop skits which bring teen issues to life.
The goal of the PG-13 Players is not to give out easy answers, but to enable teens to struggle with the realities of teen life, rehearsing the skills they need to cope with difficult situations.
The Players perform throughout the school year at schools, religious organizations, and youth-serving agencies. During the performance, the situations presented are left unresolved, leaving characters facing tough decisions. After each skit, the actors remain in character for discussion with the audience. Audience members talk to the characters as they struggle with their dilemmas. These conversations with the characters enable young audience members to rehearse decision-making and communication skills, thereby taking the education to a deeper, more personalized level.
The PG-13 Players is supported through private contributions, and grants from:
* The National Council of Jewish Women, Nashville Section
* United Way of Metropolitan Nashville
* Tennessee Department of Health
Each PG-13 Players performance lasts from 45 to 90 minutes according to your group's needs.
Performances are available in the Nashville area only.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Get Up, Stand Up
This post is simply to give thanks to the blogger at Sitting Still for standing up for a vulnerable pregnant woman during a genetic counseling session. A snippet:
"She's crying. He's yelling at her to stop crying. She's saying she doesn't want testing, doesn't want to know for sure. He's saying that she *will* have the test because he doesn't want a retarded baby."
Visit Nicole's blog to find out how she mustered up her courage and intervened on behalf of the woman.
"She's crying. He's yelling at her to stop crying. She's saying she doesn't want testing, doesn't want to know for sure. He's saying that she *will* have the test because he doesn't want a retarded baby."
Visit Nicole's blog to find out how she mustered up her courage and intervened on behalf of the woman.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Saturday News Roundup - 2/17/07
(Tidbit: Alabama's state insect is the monarch butterfly. Too bad the state animal isn't a rabbit.)
Friday, February 16, 2007
Washington, DC - Coming Together with Free Condoms
Washington, D.C. is getting in on city-branded condom distribution, much like the New York City program mentioned previously. According to the Washington Post, the District plans to give away 250,000 free condoms today, with "Coming Together to Stop HIV in DC" branding; officials say the double entendre of the slogan was unintentional. Similar to the NYC program, the condoms are expected to be placed in government buildings such as health departments, as well as bars, convenience stores, barber shops, and other locations. Organizations can request condoms for distribution through this online form.
The Department of Health has a page on their site describing the initiative to give away 1 million free condoms, with information on how to use male condoms, female condoms, female condoms for anal sex, and dental dams. The site is not quite as useful as its NYC equivalent, as it doesn't yet have information on all of the sites where condoms will be or promotional materials; perhaps it will be updated when the program is further along.
PS - Who wants to send me some? I really want a collection of city-branded condoms.
The Department of Health has a page on their site describing the initiative to give away 1 million free condoms, with information on how to use male condoms, female condoms, female condoms for anal sex, and dental dams. The site is not quite as useful as its NYC equivalent, as it doesn't yet have information on all of the sites where condoms will be or promotional materials; perhaps it will be updated when the program is further along.
PS - Who wants to send me some? I really want a collection of city-branded condoms.
More on Death Certificates for Abortion
Representative Stacey Campfield is obviously getting a lot of questions on his proposed legislation to issue death certificates for abortion. Rather than answering the questions posted to his blog on the issue, the Rep says, in what I think is a stunningly childish commentary, "You all look to be doing quite well with out me so I think I will let you all continue on without much input on my bill from me for now. A few questions I would love your input on though," and proposes his own list of questions, essentially ignoring the commentary of his contituents and other concerned Tennesseans. In a later post, he says, "I have responded to other legislators who are getting asked questions as well as Tennessee Right to Life." Again, no response for the people who are pointing out how the bill does absolutely nothing the Rep says it would do.
Now, to respond to the Rep's questions, which are truly nothing but his attempt at distraction:
1. If it is not a life, then why do you care if it gets a death certificate or not?
It has been clearly pointed out on numerous blogs that creating public records containing the names of women receiving a controversial legal medical procedure is a serious privacy issue for the women having abortions. Additionally, asking your constituents, "Why do you care?" is not the level of adult discourse we expect from politicians. You proposed the certificates, Rep, so the burden is on you to convince us what this legislation does (because what you say it does is already being done, or it does not in fact do) and why it matters.
2. Is this bill about paper work more controversial then the fact that abortions don't have to be performed by licensed doctors in Tennessee?
State law requires that "The administrator of such facility shall be: (a) A licensed physician, licensed practical nurse, registered nurse, or have a college degree from a four-year accredited institution and experience in a health-related field; and (b) Of good moral character." You're correct that some abortion providers in the hands-on setting may not be "licensed doctors;" however, you make no argument for why this is necessary, nor do you include provisions to change this in your legislation. Yet another red herring.
3.If you think I am wasting my time on this, Do you also think all of congress is wasting its time on a NON BINDING RESOLUTION that will have no effect on the direction of the war from a political point of view.
Completely irrelevant to criticisms of your proposed legislation. This is simply an attempt at distraction, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
4. If you do, have you told your congress person? Will you hold it against them for doing any thing but condemning it as a waste of time?
See above; in addition, nothing about being opposed to your bill prohibits an individual from having an opinion or contacting their legislators about Iraq. If you want to make a "if you're not doing everything, you should do nothing" argument, perhaps you should consider why you don't have provisions to reduce unwanted pregnancies in your bill.
5. If you work for the state and spend a large chunk of your day surfing the web and complaining about how bad a piece of legislation is, Do you think I should trust you to be non biased when doing an assessment of said legislation? Do you think this is an ethical lapse? Do you think I should trust you when you say you are over worked but seem to have plenty of time to surf the web and author long posts and comments on blogs during time you are getting paid to work? Do you think you would get away with it on a real job?
This is obviously directed at the blogger, an employee of the Department of Health, who commented on the fiscal waste associated with stunt legislation. Again, one person's response to the bill has nothing at all to do with whether the bill is a good one, whether it does what you say it will do, or whether you are either completely misinfored or flat-out lying about your own bill. Especially if you're not really doing your job, as you're only responding to other legislators and an anti-choice group. Distraction.
6.Is a death certificate worse then the fact that partial birth abortion is legal in Tennessee? If you had a choice to end one or the other, what would you put your effort behind stopping? Have you?
This is another mistruth; "partial birth abortion" is a Class C Felony in the state of Tennessee. See Tennessee Code : Title 39 Criminal Offenses : Chapter 15 Offenses Against the Family : Part 2 —Abortion : 39-15-209. Partial birth abortions. —
"(b) No person shall knowingly perform a partial-birth abortion.
(c) Subsection (b) shall not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of the mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness or injury."
Again, you're setting up a false choice between two issues - it's not necessary to choose to "end one or the other," so your premise is false. We'll leave along the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not a medical term, but is a "fighting word" created by anti-choice activists.
7. If you know in your heart you did "the right thing" and had an abortion why would you care if people found out? Shouldn't you be proud of it?
Legal medical care is private, and is protected by privacy laws, which you are trying to make an end run around. How the woman feels about obtaining legal medical care is none of your business. Do you think that all medical records should be open to the public? Will you release yours? However, should the names of women obtaining abortions become part of the public record, those women could be subjected to how *other* people feel about their obtaining legal medical care. Surely you remember the "abortion doctor hit list" that was posted on the Internet - some of us who are concerned about life are concerned about the ramifcations for the lives of women and their families if they become targets of zealots in this manner.
8. If you found out that taco bell has more regulation on it then an abortion clinic would that make you feel safe in your "choice"? What if you found out abortion clinics have no regulation whatsoever, no cleanliness, licensing or any thing? If you found out your legislator voted to keep it that way would you vote for them again? Did you vote Democrat this last year?
This depends on whether Taco Bell needs more regulation than an abortion clinic. Are you arguing that it does or does not? Do you have any evidence one way or the other? Whether a person voted for a Democrat last year is irrelevant to your proposed bill. It's not correct that abortion clinics have "no regulation whatsoever." Examine TN Code:
Title 68 Health, Safety and Environmental Protection : Health : Chapter 11 Health Facilities and Resources : Part 2 —Regulation of Health and Related Facilities : 68-11-201. Definitions. —
Title 39 Criminal Offenses : Chapter 15 Offenses Against the Family : Part 2 —Abortion
These are just a couple of the major sections that compose abortion regulation in Tennessee. To turn your own technique around on you, what are you doing to correct this, if it's a problem? And what does that have to do with criticism of your bill?
Honestly, these questions don't truly deserve a response, but to point out the childishness, dodging and deception Campfield is engaging in. Don't expect the Rep to actually address the serious questions associated with this bill. Thanks to Nashville is Talking for pointing out Campfield's new post, and Brittney for noting the hypocrisy of Campfield claiming to not have time to respond to valid criticism, but having had the time to set up the above list of irrelevant, distracting nonsense.
Now, to respond to the Rep's questions, which are truly nothing but his attempt at distraction:
1. If it is not a life, then why do you care if it gets a death certificate or not?
It has been clearly pointed out on numerous blogs that creating public records containing the names of women receiving a controversial legal medical procedure is a serious privacy issue for the women having abortions. Additionally, asking your constituents, "Why do you care?" is not the level of adult discourse we expect from politicians. You proposed the certificates, Rep, so the burden is on you to convince us what this legislation does (because what you say it does is already being done, or it does not in fact do) and why it matters.
2. Is this bill about paper work more controversial then the fact that abortions don't have to be performed by licensed doctors in Tennessee?
State law requires that "The administrator of such facility shall be: (a) A licensed physician, licensed practical nurse, registered nurse, or have a college degree from a four-year accredited institution and experience in a health-related field; and (b) Of good moral character." You're correct that some abortion providers in the hands-on setting may not be "licensed doctors;" however, you make no argument for why this is necessary, nor do you include provisions to change this in your legislation. Yet another red herring.
3.If you think I am wasting my time on this, Do you also think all of congress is wasting its time on a NON BINDING RESOLUTION that will have no effect on the direction of the war from a political point of view.
Completely irrelevant to criticisms of your proposed legislation. This is simply an attempt at distraction, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
4. If you do, have you told your congress person? Will you hold it against them for doing any thing but condemning it as a waste of time?
See above; in addition, nothing about being opposed to your bill prohibits an individual from having an opinion or contacting their legislators about Iraq. If you want to make a "if you're not doing everything, you should do nothing" argument, perhaps you should consider why you don't have provisions to reduce unwanted pregnancies in your bill.
5. If you work for the state and spend a large chunk of your day surfing the web and complaining about how bad a piece of legislation is, Do you think I should trust you to be non biased when doing an assessment of said legislation? Do you think this is an ethical lapse? Do you think I should trust you when you say you are over worked but seem to have plenty of time to surf the web and author long posts and comments on blogs during time you are getting paid to work? Do you think you would get away with it on a real job?
This is obviously directed at the blogger, an employee of the Department of Health, who commented on the fiscal waste associated with stunt legislation. Again, one person's response to the bill has nothing at all to do with whether the bill is a good one, whether it does what you say it will do, or whether you are either completely misinfored or flat-out lying about your own bill. Especially if you're not really doing your job, as you're only responding to other legislators and an anti-choice group. Distraction.
6.Is a death certificate worse then the fact that partial birth abortion is legal in Tennessee? If you had a choice to end one or the other, what would you put your effort behind stopping? Have you?
This is another mistruth; "partial birth abortion" is a Class C Felony in the state of Tennessee. See Tennessee Code : Title 39 Criminal Offenses : Chapter 15 Offenses Against the Family : Part 2 —Abortion : 39-15-209. Partial birth abortions. —
"(b) No person shall knowingly perform a partial-birth abortion.
(c) Subsection (b) shall not apply to a partial-birth abortion that is necessary to save the life of the mother whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, illness or injury."
Again, you're setting up a false choice between two issues - it's not necessary to choose to "end one or the other," so your premise is false. We'll leave along the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not a medical term, but is a "fighting word" created by anti-choice activists.
7. If you know in your heart you did "the right thing" and had an abortion why would you care if people found out? Shouldn't you be proud of it?
Legal medical care is private, and is protected by privacy laws, which you are trying to make an end run around. How the woman feels about obtaining legal medical care is none of your business. Do you think that all medical records should be open to the public? Will you release yours? However, should the names of women obtaining abortions become part of the public record, those women could be subjected to how *other* people feel about their obtaining legal medical care. Surely you remember the "abortion doctor hit list" that was posted on the Internet - some of us who are concerned about life are concerned about the ramifcations for the lives of women and their families if they become targets of zealots in this manner.
8. If you found out that taco bell has more regulation on it then an abortion clinic would that make you feel safe in your "choice"? What if you found out abortion clinics have no regulation whatsoever, no cleanliness, licensing or any thing? If you found out your legislator voted to keep it that way would you vote for them again? Did you vote Democrat this last year?
This depends on whether Taco Bell needs more regulation than an abortion clinic. Are you arguing that it does or does not? Do you have any evidence one way or the other? Whether a person voted for a Democrat last year is irrelevant to your proposed bill. It's not correct that abortion clinics have "no regulation whatsoever." Examine TN Code:
These are just a couple of the major sections that compose abortion regulation in Tennessee. To turn your own technique around on you, what are you doing to correct this, if it's a problem? And what does that have to do with criticism of your bill?
Honestly, these questions don't truly deserve a response, but to point out the childishness, dodging and deception Campfield is engaging in. Don't expect the Rep to actually address the serious questions associated with this bill. Thanks to Nashville is Talking for pointing out Campfield's new post, and Brittney for noting the hypocrisy of Campfield claiming to not have time to respond to valid criticism, but having had the time to set up the above list of irrelevant, distracting nonsense.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
NYC Condoms - Get Some
As mentioned in a previous post, New York City gave out 150,000 free condoms in the subways for Valentine's Day. The free condom extravaganza doesn't end there - the city has established the NYC Condom website, which provides info on the numerous locations in the city where free city-branded condoms can be obtained, including bars, hair salons, health departments, and even a dry cleaner. Organizations can order online to receive condoms for distribution. The New York Times has an article on the initiative, and you can also read the Health Department's press release. I'd love to see more cities take such a proactive approach to condom distribution. Warning: This site mucks up the operation of Firefox for me, so I have to close the window to get back to other tabs. Your mileage may vary.
PS - Who wants to send me some? :)
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Next Tuesday
Is the day.
The day that I might get some type of answers regarding Zachary.
We've been told that February 20th, the infamous Sheila (the counselor) will be coming to evaluate Zachary within the classroom. She won't be interacting WITH Zachary, just watching him and how he interacts with the teacher, the other students and himself. The teacher, myself and Chuck all have to complete a questionnaire about our experiences with Zachary, as well.
So, we probably won't get any answers that day. But at least I'll feel like we have finally accomplished *something*. That we may be on our way to helping him.
Tuesday of this week we received a letter from our insurance company (after only 6 1/2 months since our initial visit) that they are denying any testing for Zachary. Their reason is that it is only for "educational purposes" and there is nothing medically wrong with him.
Oh, realllly? Wanna come hang out with him 24/7?? Supposedly this Sheila should be able to help with referrels and insurances and appeals to get him whatever he needs. I hope so.
On another note, Zachary asked Chuck the night after he told me he wanted a new mom and dad:
Z: "Daddy, remember how I said I wanted a new momma and daddy?"
C: "Yep"
Z: "That was kind of a mean thing to say wasn't it?"
C: Well yea, buddy, it's wasn't really nice.
Z: I didn't really mean it. I do want you and momma as my momma and daddy.
This kid is really such a sweetheart. It was completely out of the blue and neither Chuck nor I mentioned it to him after my initial conversation with him about it. That's Zachary's saving grace...his sweet nature.
The day that I might get some type of answers regarding Zachary.
We've been told that February 20th, the infamous Sheila (the counselor) will be coming to evaluate Zachary within the classroom. She won't be interacting WITH Zachary, just watching him and how he interacts with the teacher, the other students and himself. The teacher, myself and Chuck all have to complete a questionnaire about our experiences with Zachary, as well.
So, we probably won't get any answers that day. But at least I'll feel like we have finally accomplished *something*. That we may be on our way to helping him.
Tuesday of this week we received a letter from our insurance company (after only 6 1/2 months since our initial visit) that they are denying any testing for Zachary. Their reason is that it is only for "educational purposes" and there is nothing medically wrong with him.
Oh, realllly? Wanna come hang out with him 24/7?? Supposedly this Sheila should be able to help with referrels and insurances and appeals to get him whatever he needs. I hope so.
On another note, Zachary asked Chuck the night after he told me he wanted a new mom and dad:
Z: "Daddy, remember how I said I wanted a new momma and daddy?"
C: "Yep"
Z: "That was kind of a mean thing to say wasn't it?"
C: Well yea, buddy, it's wasn't really nice.
Z: I didn't really mean it. I do want you and momma as my momma and daddy.
This kid is really such a sweetheart. It was completely out of the blue and neither Chuck nor I mentioned it to him after my initial conversation with him about it. That's Zachary's saving grace...his sweet nature.
5 words to describe your marriage
Among the "moms" today there was discussion about what 5 words would describe your marriage/relationship.
It took me a few minutes to come up with some words. Not because I couldn't think of any, it's just that some didn't fit.
As I was reading through what other people had used to describe and define their relationship, I felt a little sad for them.
Comfortable, Relaxed, Safe were used on several peoples lists....and not just one of them, but ALL of them.
Chuck and I have a comfortable relationship and I definitely feel safe with him and relaxed around him. Afterall, we've been together for 10 years and have *almost* 3 children together. But I don't think of those words as defining our relationship. They are a part of it, sure, but doesn't define who we are.
I chose 5 words and still was struggling for the correct word on some of them:
Unconditional
Enjoyable
Hard
Passionate
Complimentary
After I wrote my words, another person used Challenging and I think I like that word even better than hard. Our relationship is full of challenges. It's definitely not perfect, however, we are both unconditionally committed to our relationship and making it work that not being perfect is a-ok. I would rather have a relationship that was enjoyable and passionate, than a laxa-daisy relationship that was so comfortable it became boring.
Why is our relationship challenging? Might I remind you of the *almost* 3 kids. That's challenge in and of itself. We also work opposite shifts and see each other maybe 10 minutes a day. And yes, we have problems. But those problems we are working on diligently, and I think we are becoming a stronger, more united couple because of it.
After I wrote my words down, I asked Chuck what words he would use to describe us. I think it's a good sign that we chose the same parts of our relationship to define us...and used similar (even though they aren't the same words).
Love
Commitment
Partnership
Frustrating
Kinky
So here's how I see our comparison:
Unconditional=Commitment
Enjoyable=Love (I didn't want to sound clique by using love. LOL)
Hard=Frustrating
Passionate=Kinky (um, yea, we are passionately kinky. Anyone knowing us IRL would say so!)
Complimentary=Partnership
And those words are all a-ok with me. While it's not perfect, it's the fact that we are working on it. And as one mom said "Getting better all the time".
That's us. Happy Valentine's Day!
It took me a few minutes to come up with some words. Not because I couldn't think of any, it's just that some didn't fit.
As I was reading through what other people had used to describe and define their relationship, I felt a little sad for them.
Comfortable, Relaxed, Safe were used on several peoples lists....and not just one of them, but ALL of them.
Chuck and I have a comfortable relationship and I definitely feel safe with him and relaxed around him. Afterall, we've been together for 10 years and have *almost* 3 children together. But I don't think of those words as defining our relationship. They are a part of it, sure, but doesn't define who we are.
I chose 5 words and still was struggling for the correct word on some of them:
Unconditional
Enjoyable
Hard
Passionate
Complimentary
After I wrote my words, another person used Challenging and I think I like that word even better than hard. Our relationship is full of challenges. It's definitely not perfect, however, we are both unconditionally committed to our relationship and making it work that not being perfect is a-ok. I would rather have a relationship that was enjoyable and passionate, than a laxa-daisy relationship that was so comfortable it became boring.
Why is our relationship challenging? Might I remind you of the *almost* 3 kids. That's challenge in and of itself. We also work opposite shifts and see each other maybe 10 minutes a day. And yes, we have problems. But those problems we are working on diligently, and I think we are becoming a stronger, more united couple because of it.
After I wrote my words down, I asked Chuck what words he would use to describe us. I think it's a good sign that we chose the same parts of our relationship to define us...and used similar (even though they aren't the same words).
Love
Commitment
Partnership
Frustrating
Kinky
So here's how I see our comparison:
Unconditional=Commitment
Enjoyable=Love (I didn't want to sound clique by using love. LOL)
Hard=Frustrating
Passionate=Kinky (um, yea, we are passionately kinky. Anyone knowing us IRL would say so!)
Complimentary=Partnership
And those words are all a-ok with me. While it's not perfect, it's the fact that we are working on it. And as one mom said "Getting better all the time".
That's us. Happy Valentine's Day!
Breastfeeding Welcome
Mothering Magazine had a contest to design a symbol that would serve as "an international symbol for breastfeeding is to increase public awareness of breastfeeding, to provide an alternative to the use of a baby bottle image to designate baby friendly areas in public, and to mark breastfeeding friendly facilities." The symbol (shown at left) has been donated to the public domain, and can be posted anywhere to indicate a breastfeeding-friendly environment. Meanwhile, New York City is spending $2 million+ in city hospitals to encourage breastfeeding.
Thanks to Belly Tales for pointing out both stories.
Technorati Tags: breastfeeding
MeSH Tags: Breast Feeding
Tennessee Representative Proposes Death Certificates for Abortion
Tennessee State Representative Stacey Campfield has proposed legislation that would require "A death certificate for each induced termination of pregnancy which occurs in this state shall be filed with the office of vital records within ten (10) days after the procedure by the person in charge of the institution in which the induced termination of pregnancy was performed."
In his blog post on the proposed legislation, Campfield states his purpose as "This bill will give information to the state that is not available now on how many abortions are given each year as well as information on race, age, weight. It will also give consistency to when and what is a life based on factors that are already used and consistent. When we make the definition of life a little more consistent we can begin to treat it with the respect it deserves and not base it on whims of fancy." In truth, information on how many abortions are performed is already required to be reported to the State. In an interview, the Rep said, "All these people who say they are pro-life — at least we would see how many lives are being ended out there by abortions." The bill also does nothing to define "what is a life," and does not require death certificates for all miscarriages - State law does issue some certificates for miscarriage, depending on weight/age (500 grams or 22 weeks), but not for all, and not in the first trimester, when most abortions occur (the CDC estimates that 1.4% of abortions occur after 21 weeks). So at the same stage we would be issuing death certificates for most abortions, the State would not issue one for a miscarriage, because it wasn't far enough along. How's that for clearing up "what is life?" Thus far, we have a bill that does nothing that the Rep says it would do.
The pressing question, as mentioned by several folks in the roundup below, is privacy, as the effect would be that the State would essentially be creating a set of records identifying women who had abortions. Vital Records are publically available documents, and death certificates include parental information. It is not currently clear whether and how the State would handle requests for this information, or whether HIPAA laws would apply. HIPAA does not usually cover death certificates, but providing the certificates with parental details in this case would essentially be providing a living woman's medical record/history details to the requestor (rather than cause of death for a deceased person). I'm concerned that, if made available, these records could be used to intimidate/harass/target women who have had abortions. If so, that could put women and entire families in jeopardy.
It's not entirely surprising that this bill would do nothing in terms of using the information to target preventive services, provide reproductive healthcare to vulnerable populations, or otherwise take actual measures to reduce abortion. What it would do is create a climate of fear and privacy invasion for women and an additional reporting burden for providers (who currently have to report on abortions, but in a confidential manner and not within 10 days - nobody really needs that information within 10 days.)
So, Campfield, are you simply misinformed about the existing data collection requirements, or is this really an attempt to make an end run around state laws/medical privacy?
See Update, 2/16/07
A Roundup of Tennessee Bloggers:
The Rep Himself - Is it a Life?
Tiny Cat Pants - Stacey Campfield Wants in Your Medical Records; I Appeal to You Anti-Abortion Folks; Stace, Shall I Send My Used Tampons to You or to the Medical Examiner?
Tennessee Guerilla Women - TN Lawmaker Wants State to Call a Fetus a Person
Thoughts of an Average Woman - Death Certificates for Fetuses Would Identify Women
No Silence Here - More GOP Big Government
Cup of Joe Powell - Campfield Targets Women?
Volunteer Voters - More Talk of Certificates for Clumpy - "This bill accomplishes only one goal: getting Stacey Campfield's name in the paper. That's all this does. Campfield, by introducing this bill has done nothing for the unborn or the cause of Life. He is an embarrassment and impediment to it." - AC, we finally agree on something!
Salem's Lots - Here’s one for all you folks who want to cut out waste in government - Interesting fiscal perspective from a Dept. of Health Employee
In the News:
Knoxville News-Sentinel - Abortions: Lawmaker touts death certificates
In his blog post on the proposed legislation, Campfield states his purpose as "This bill will give information to the state that is not available now on how many abortions are given each year as well as information on race, age, weight. It will also give consistency to when and what is a life based on factors that are already used and consistent. When we make the definition of life a little more consistent we can begin to treat it with the respect it deserves and not base it on whims of fancy." In truth, information on how many abortions are performed is already required to be reported to the State. In an interview, the Rep said, "All these people who say they are pro-life — at least we would see how many lives are being ended out there by abortions." The bill also does nothing to define "what is a life," and does not require death certificates for all miscarriages - State law does issue some certificates for miscarriage, depending on weight/age (500 grams or 22 weeks), but not for all, and not in the first trimester, when most abortions occur (the CDC estimates that 1.4% of abortions occur after 21 weeks). So at the same stage we would be issuing death certificates for most abortions, the State would not issue one for a miscarriage, because it wasn't far enough along. How's that for clearing up "what is life?" Thus far, we have a bill that does nothing that the Rep says it would do.
The pressing question, as mentioned by several folks in the roundup below, is privacy, as the effect would be that the State would essentially be creating a set of records identifying women who had abortions. Vital Records are publically available documents, and death certificates include parental information. It is not currently clear whether and how the State would handle requests for this information, or whether HIPAA laws would apply. HIPAA does not usually cover death certificates, but providing the certificates with parental details in this case would essentially be providing a living woman's medical record/history details to the requestor (rather than cause of death for a deceased person). I'm concerned that, if made available, these records could be used to intimidate/harass/target women who have had abortions. If so, that could put women and entire families in jeopardy.
It's not entirely surprising that this bill would do nothing in terms of using the information to target preventive services, provide reproductive healthcare to vulnerable populations, or otherwise take actual measures to reduce abortion. What it would do is create a climate of fear and privacy invasion for women and an additional reporting burden for providers (who currently have to report on abortions, but in a confidential manner and not within 10 days - nobody really needs that information within 10 days.)
So, Campfield, are you simply misinformed about the existing data collection requirements, or is this really an attempt to make an end run around state laws/medical privacy?
See Update, 2/16/07
A Roundup of Tennessee Bloggers:
In the News:
Safer Sex Wednesday
From the New York Times:
Free Condoms on the Subway? And Who Says New Yorkers Aren’t Friendly?
Greatest Generation Learns About Great Safe Sex - "By the time Ms. Binford got around to describing a safe sexual act involving Saran Wrap, a woman shouted, 'Enough, already!' and the room erupted in laughter."
Free Condoms on the Subway? And Who Says New Yorkers Aren’t Friendly?
Greatest Generation Learns About Great Safe Sex - "By the time Ms. Binford got around to describing a safe sexual act involving Saran Wrap, a woman shouted, 'Enough, already!' and the room erupted in laughter."
Happy National Condom Week
Did you know that Valentine's Day kicks off National Condom Week? Neither did I, and I have Tyler at RHReality Check to thank for pointing it out.
Press release and condom info from the American Social Health Association
Silly slogans - "If you think she's spunky, cover your monkey"
Guttmacher Institute press release
National Condom Week of Action from FeministCampus (part of the Feminist Majority Foundation), with everything you need to know about condoms and an e-card (scroll down until you see a shamrock)
The Condom - info from Planned Parenthood
Talking to your partner about condoms
Birth Control - Condom - KidsHealth
Condoms: Effective birth control and protection from sexually transmitted diseases - MayoClinic.com
How Effective Are Latex Condoms in Preventing HIV? - CDC
While you're reading about condoms, don't forget that the Great American Condom Campaign needs your support.
While you're reading about condoms, don't forget that the Great American Condom Campaign needs your support.
Maternity Scrubs
Someone arrived at this blog from a search for "scrubs for pregnant women." Admittedly, I never thought of this as a need, because scrubs are so stretchy in the first place. However, I did some searching and turned up a few companies offering maternity scrubs. Please note that I have no experience or ties with these companies and can't vouch for the quality or fit, and that this list is not exhaustive.
ScrubMed - maternity tunic and maternity pants
Accent Uniforms - maternity tops and pants
GOTOSCRUBS - maternity pants by Landau, print maternity tunics by Karesan
Scrubies - maternity pants and tunics
Sassy Scrubs - tops, pants, and jackets
AllHeart - maternity scrubs from various companies
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Responding to the Clinicians and Conscience Study
The New York Times has published an editorial in response to the study summarized here last week that found some physicians would withhold treatment, referrals, and information from patients when they had personal objections to certain legal procedures. In part, the editorial states:
"Although the close-mouthed doctors claim a right to follow their consciences, they are grievously failing their patients and seem to have forgotten the age-old admonition to “do no harm"...The researchers put the burden on patients to question their doctors upfront to learn where they stand before a crisis develops. But that lets doctors off the hook. Physicians have a right to shun practices they judge immoral, but they have no right to withhold important information from their patients. Any doctors who cannot talk to patients about legally permitted care because it conflicts with their values should give up the practice of medicine."
"Although the close-mouthed doctors claim a right to follow their consciences, they are grievously failing their patients and seem to have forgotten the age-old admonition to “do no harm"...The researchers put the burden on patients to question their doctors upfront to learn where they stand before a crisis develops. But that lets doctors off the hook. Physicians have a right to shun practices they judge immoral, but they have no right to withhold important information from their patients. Any doctors who cannot talk to patients about legally permitted care because it conflicts with their values should give up the practice of medicine."
Reminder: Motherland Afghanistan Airs Tonight
Motherland Afghanistan, on the state of women's healthcare in Afghanistan and one man's attempt to help in the crisis, airs tonight on your PBS station.
Update: After watching the film, you may wish to take a moment to contact your Senators/Representative to ask them to support the Afghan Women Empowerment Act of 2007, which would include the authorization of $30,000,000 (each fiscal year 2008-2010) "for grants to Afghan women-led nonprofit organizations to support activities including the construction, establishment, and operation of schools for married girls and girls' orphanages, vocational training and human rights education for women and girls, health care clinics for women and children, programs to strengthen Afghan women-led organizations and women's leadership, and to provide monthly financial assistance to widows, orphans, and women head of households." The legislation also includes monetary support for the Afghan Ministry of Women's Affairs and the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission.
The Feminist Majority Foundation has a letter of support all set up for you, which will automatically identify your Congressional representatives.
Update: After watching the film, you may wish to take a moment to contact your Senators/Representative to ask them to support the Afghan Women Empowerment Act of 2007, which would include the authorization of $30,000,000 (each fiscal year 2008-2010) "for grants to Afghan women-led nonprofit organizations to support activities including the construction, establishment, and operation of schools for married girls and girls' orphanages, vocational training and human rights education for women and girls, health care clinics for women and children, programs to strengthen Afghan women-led organizations and women's leadership, and to provide monthly financial assistance to widows, orphans, and women head of households." The legislation also includes monetary support for the Afghan Ministry of Women's Affairs and the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission.
The Feminist Majority Foundation has a letter of support all set up for you, which will automatically identify your Congressional representatives.
The Great American Condom Campaign Needs Your Help
The Great American Condom Campaign needs your help to continue to the important work of ensuring that all people have access to condoms and appropriate disease prevention and contraceptive information. To learn more, visit the links at the bottom of this post. Your donation will help support this work, including providing 100 condoms a month to registered SafeSites for distribution to the community. From an email, republished with permission:
Just wanted to check in and ask that you give a few bucks to The Great American Condom Campaign. We are in a very challenging financial situation. As you might know, our flagship project, "Safesites" - a national grass-roots condom distribution program - has expanded FAR faster than any of us had predicted: Reaching ten times more people per month than we thought we could hit in a year. This is a GREAT problem to have, to be sure, but the added cost of creating a logistical system to support the 90,000 people we are hitting every month has been hard on us. Especially considering we are a volunteer organization. None of us are paid. No salaries. No benefits. Nothing. In fact, the whole Campaign has been self-financed for the past year and a half. The only problem is that we've run out of things to sell, houses to mortgage, and loans to get to pay for this very important next phase.
It is hard to ask for money, but I can not think of a more worthwhile cause to ask for your support on. I'm not asking you for $10,000 (but if you gave it, I would be hard-pressed to say no ;) but I am asking you to consider giving as much as you can. Twenty bucks from you, in the context of two thousand other people giving $20, makes a huge difference.
Every little bit counts, Rachel. Get your friends to donate, your office, your neighbors -- your contribution will make a difference, I guarantee that. Please donate right now, just visit our homepage and click on the blonde in the lower left corner. It takes less than a minute.
Please also feel free to contact me directly whenever you like at stephen@condomcampaign.org or 202.341.0656.
Be Great,
Stephen
Stephen B. Sobhani, MPP
The Great American Condom Campaign
www.condomcampaign.org
Great American Condom Campaign
PO Box 3769
Washington, DC 20027
Related Info:
Why a Condom Campaign?
SafeSites Sign Up
How To Use A Condom
STIs 101 - info on a range of sexually transmitted infections
Just wanted to check in and ask that you give a few bucks to The Great American Condom Campaign. We are in a very challenging financial situation. As you might know, our flagship project, "Safesites" - a national grass-roots condom distribution program - has expanded FAR faster than any of us had predicted: Reaching ten times more people per month than we thought we could hit in a year. This is a GREAT problem to have, to be sure, but the added cost of creating a logistical system to support the 90,000 people we are hitting every month has been hard on us. Especially considering we are a volunteer organization. None of us are paid. No salaries. No benefits. Nothing. In fact, the whole Campaign has been self-financed for the past year and a half. The only problem is that we've run out of things to sell, houses to mortgage, and loans to get to pay for this very important next phase.
It is hard to ask for money, but I can not think of a more worthwhile cause to ask for your support on. I'm not asking you for $10,000 (but if you gave it, I would be hard-pressed to say no ;) but I am asking you to consider giving as much as you can. Twenty bucks from you, in the context of two thousand other people giving $20, makes a huge difference.
Every little bit counts, Rachel. Get your friends to donate, your office, your neighbors -- your contribution will make a difference, I guarantee that. Please donate right now, just visit our homepage and click on the blonde in the lower left corner. It takes less than a minute.
Please also feel free to contact me directly whenever you like at stephen@condomcampaign.org or 202.341.0656.
Be Great,
Stephen
Stephen B. Sobhani, MPP
The Great American Condom Campaign
www.condomcampaign.org
Great American Condom Campaign
PO Box 3769
Washington, DC 20027
Related Info:
Why a Condom Campaign?
SafeSites Sign Up
How To Use A Condom
STIs 101 - info on a range of sexually transmitted infections
Sunday, February 11, 2007
One to Watch: Motherland Afghanistan
In Motherland Afghanistan, filmaker Sedika Mojadidi follows her OB/GYN father to Afghanistan to witness his work in a Kabul maternity ward (once the Rabia Balkhi maternity women's hospital, renamed the Laura Bush Maternity Ward). Dr. Mojadidi was asked by the U.S. Government to help rehabilitate post-Taliban Rabi Balkhi in 2003, and the film documents the doctor's frustration and lack of support (including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's failure to supply the promise basic medical supplies and equipment), and the resulting difficulties in providing medical care for Afghanistan's women. As the piece reports, Afghanistan has the second highest maternal mortality rate in the world, with a 2000 survey finding 1,600 maternal deaths for every 100,000 live births. In the same year, only 10% of Afghanistan's clinics were equipped to perform c-sections, and 2/3rds could not provide basic reproductive health services. According to World Health Organization statistics from 2000, only Sierra Leone experiences more maternal deaths (2,000 per 100,000 live births). By comparison, the United States experienced only 16 deaths per 100,000 live births. While some estimates disagree on the exact numbers, the rate of maternal mortality in Afghanistan is nonetheless extremely high.
Motherland Afghanistan makes real the problems of a broken healthcare system that cannot provide enough trained doctors, infrastructure, or knowledge to properly care of the nation's pregnant women. Alongside images of the Afghanistan landscape and insight into the culture and social climate, the documentary presents startling images of broken, overflowing sinks, filthy toilets, patients bringing their own medical supplies, and other scenes from a hospital on the edge of ruin. It also presents up-close encounters with the women affected by this lack of care. Yet when Dr. Mojadidi complains to the HHS that they have not fulfilled their promises to send money and supplies, he receives in return only a letter congratulating him on his good works. The doctor eventually leaves the country in frustration.
Two years later, in 2005, the filmmaker once again follows her father to Afghanistan, this time to an NGO-sponsored medical facility. While conditions are better there, the doctors, patients, and families still face extraordinary hurdles in providing even the most basic care. One baby is born prematurely at 7 months; in the U.S. the baby might survive, but in this facility with no incubators, where the baby is fed milk via a spoon, the chances of a good outcome are strikingly lower. The film also highlights the problem of fistula, an injury that can occur when emergency care is not available to laboring women, resulting in a hole between the bladder and vagina or rectum and vagina. One woman has seemingly suffered from this problem, with urine leaking from her bladder into her vagina and down her legs, for 8 months before receiving care.
The features shown on Independent Lens are typically informative and moving, and this documentary is no exception. Motherland Afghanistan is an eye-opening and worthwhile look at the state of reproductive health care in Afghanistan. Visit the website and see these selected resources to further explore this topic.
Motherland Afghanistan can be seen this week on Tuesday, February 13th as the Independent Lens broadcast on your local public television station. [search for showtimes]
Thanks to itvs for provision of a screener copy of the film.
Motherland Afghanistan makes real the problems of a broken healthcare system that cannot provide enough trained doctors, infrastructure, or knowledge to properly care of the nation's pregnant women. Alongside images of the Afghanistan landscape and insight into the culture and social climate, the documentary presents startling images of broken, overflowing sinks, filthy toilets, patients bringing their own medical supplies, and other scenes from a hospital on the edge of ruin. It also presents up-close encounters with the women affected by this lack of care. Yet when Dr. Mojadidi complains to the HHS that they have not fulfilled their promises to send money and supplies, he receives in return only a letter congratulating him on his good works. The doctor eventually leaves the country in frustration.
Two years later, in 2005, the filmmaker once again follows her father to Afghanistan, this time to an NGO-sponsored medical facility. While conditions are better there, the doctors, patients, and families still face extraordinary hurdles in providing even the most basic care. One baby is born prematurely at 7 months; in the U.S. the baby might survive, but in this facility with no incubators, where the baby is fed milk via a spoon, the chances of a good outcome are strikingly lower. The film also highlights the problem of fistula, an injury that can occur when emergency care is not available to laboring women, resulting in a hole between the bladder and vagina or rectum and vagina. One woman has seemingly suffered from this problem, with urine leaking from her bladder into her vagina and down her legs, for 8 months before receiving care.
The features shown on Independent Lens are typically informative and moving, and this documentary is no exception. Motherland Afghanistan is an eye-opening and worthwhile look at the state of reproductive health care in Afghanistan. Visit the website and see these selected resources to further explore this topic.
Motherland Afghanistan can be seen this week on Tuesday, February 13th as the Independent Lens broadcast on your local public television station. [search for showtimes]
Thanks to itvs for provision of a screener copy of the film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)