Voters Support Broad Reproductive Health Agenda November 5 - From California to New Hampshire and in state after state, American voters on November 4 affirmed President-elect Barack Obama’s support for a broad reproductive health agenda based on individual rights and personal responsibility.
Obama, a strong pro-choice advocate, repeatedly opposed government intrusion into important life decisions while asking Americans to respect differences and work together. “Obama envisions a society that allows Americans to move past the division that has defined a generation of the most bitter politics, division that brought our government to a stalemate,” said commentator Scott Swenson in a Reproductive Health Reality Check blog posting.
In perhaps the most resounding defeat for an extremist position, Colorado voters rejected by a three-to-one margin a proposal that would have given legal rights to fertilized eggs, making abortion the legal equivalent of murder and creating a legal nightmare.
In California, voters for the third time defeated an initiative that would have required teens either to inform their parents before having an abortion or charge a parent with abuse. For the second time, South Dakota voters rejected a ban on abortion by 55 to 45 percent, finding inadequate its narrow exceptions for cases of rape, incest or threats to the mother’s health or life.
Michigan lifted its ban on embryonic stem-cell research into cures for chronic disease, while Washington became the second state after Oregon to authorize doctor-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients.
“Women and families are the real winners in this election,” said Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). “We need government policies that improve access to health care, not take it away.” Pro-choice victories in congressional races are “a major step toward getting our country back on track,” she said.
Pro-choice Democrats took six Senate races against anti-choice opponents: former governors Jeanne Shaheen and Mark Warner won in New Hampshire and Virginia respectively, while incumbent Mary Landrieu was victorious in Louisiana. Rep. Tom Udall took the seat of retiring anti-choice Sen. Pete Domenici in New Mexico, and State Sen. Kay Hagan ousted anti-choice Sen. Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina, while Rep. Mark Udall won in Colorado.
“Udall’s victory is a sign that voters are tired of the divisive attacks of the past and are ready for a change,” said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Other pro-choice winners took House seats in Arizona, Colorado and Illinois, with many races yet to be reported.
The results were “a clear message: personal, private health care decisions should be made by women, their doctors and their families, not by politicians,” said PPFA’s Richards.
The New York-based Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health hailed the victories as “a hopeful and joyous day for physicians who care about women’s health.” In a statement, however, the organization warned against “any midnight regulations the Bush administration may force through” before leaving office in January. “We cannot drop our guard in the waning days of the Bush presidency.”
Colorado Voters Reject Anti-Birth Control Amendment November 5 - Colorado made election news headlines on Nov. 5 – and not just because it was a battleground in the presidential race. For the first time in U.S. history – but probably not the last – voters were asked to give constitutional and legal rights to fertilized eggs. They refused. By a three-to-one margin, Colorado voters rejected the proposed Amendment 48 ballot initiative.
It was a so-called “personhood” strategy designed by anti-birth control extremists to draw legal challenges that could allow the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse Roe v. Wade. “Personhood” initiatives threaten access to birth control, quality health care and family privacy, and create a legal nightmare. They threaten in vitro fertilization, stem cell research, common forms of birth control and access to emergency contraception used by many rape and incest victims.
“Personhood” measures could ban widely-used forms of birth control like the IUD and forms of the Pill that work by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Emergency Contraception, which is effective up to 72 hours after intercourse and is used widely by rape and incest victims, could be banned for the same reason. In vitro fertilization could be banned since fertilized eggs created in this process would have full legal rights. Embryonic stem cell research, which is leading toward cures for chronic diseases and disabilities, could be banned under “personhood” measures. Any woman with a serious illness, such as cancer, could be denied access to life-saving medical treatment because it could endanger a fertilized egg.
The language of the proposed amendment usually appears to be simple: Colorado’s Amendment 48 defined the term “person” as “any human being from the moment of fertilization.”
The Colorado Bar Association opposed Amendment 48 because it would clog the courts with unnecessary and time-consuming litigation; Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, a self-described pro-life Democrat, joined the opposition, calling it a “legal nightmare”; and an October 13 New York Times editorial called Amendment 48 a “preposterous measure.”
For more information, please visit: http://www.birthcontrolwatch.org
Organization Opposing the Initiative: Protect Families, Protect Choices
Organization Supporting the Initiative: Colorado for Equal Rights
Sexy TV Shows Linked to Teen Pregnancy Rates Chicago, November 3 – Teens who watch a lot of sexy television shows are more likely to get pregnant or cause a pregnancy than those who watch less racy fare, according to a study published today by the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The study in the academy’s Pediatrics journal tracked more than 700 sexually active teens age 12 to 17 for three years and found that those who viewed the greatest amount of flirting, necking, discussion of sex and sex scenes were about twice as likely to be involved in a pregnancy than those who saw the least.
“We found a strong association,” lead researcher Anita Chandra of the Rand Corporation told The Washington Post. She said sexual content on TV had doubled in the past few years, especially during the research period. Shows the teens watched included Sex and the City, Friends and That 70s Show, she said.
The study is the first to indicate that TV viewing could be playing a role in the recent uptick in the U.S. teen pregnancy rate, after nearly a decade of decline. James Wagoner of Advocates for Youth said the finding underscored the importance of providing evidence-based comprehensive sex education courses to young people. “The absolutely last thing we should do in response is bury our heads in the sand and promote failed abstinence-only programs,” he said.
Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute cautioned that just turning off the TV would be unlikely to alter teens’ sexual habits. “It may be the kids who have an interest in sex watch the shows with sexual content,” she said.
Global Trend Towards Rational Abortion Policies Continues New York, October 29 - The global trend towards rational abortion policies continued worldwide over the past decade, with more liberal conditions approved in 26 countries, the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute reported this week.
The changes since 1998 included broader grounds for legal procedures in 16 countries, while 10 other countries eased restrictions by approving decentralized facilities or expanding the types of approved providers and the range of available methods, said authors Reed Boland of the Harvard School of Public Health and Laura Katzive of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
“An important driving force behind this trend has been the growing concern among regional and international human rights bodies about the negative impact of abortion restrictions on women’s health and well-being,” the institute said in a statement.
Notable positive changes occurred in Colombia, Mexico and east and south Asia, including Australia. A total of 56 countries, where nearly 40 percent of all people live, now have laws that permit abortion without restriction as to reason. The authors said the trend will be difficult to reverse as more countries recognize the impact of abortion restrictions on women’s human rights and public health.
Most countries, even those with relatively liberal laws, still have penal code restrictions that make abortion a crime in some circumstances, the study noted, and 68 countries with 28 percent of the world’s population either prohibit abortions entirely or permit it only to save the mother’s life. “Maternal mortality related to unsafe abortion is generally high where abortion is severely restricted,” it said.
Eastern and central European countries, including Russia, approved new procedural and legal restrictions on abortion, but their laws remain among the world’s most liberal, the study said, Only two countries—Nicaragua and El Salvador—moved to ban abortion under all circumstances.
Laura Katzive, Acting Director for the International Legal Program at the Center for Reproductive Rights, commented “We’ve been watching abortion law developments over the last 10 years and have been glad to see that, despite the many attacks on reproductive rights during this period, many more countries have acted to liberalize abortion laws than to restrict them. Governments are increasingly recognizing that when a woman is denied safe reproductive health care, she is being denied a basic human right-the ability to make healthy decisions about her body and ultimately, her own well-being.”
The study, “Developments in Laws on Induced Abotion: 1998-2007” appears in the September 2008 issue of the Guttmacher publication International Family Planning Perspectives.
PLANetWire.org Featured Stories 
|
RH Reality Check
Connect to the reproductive health blogosphere
