Reproductive Rights Prof Blog

"The Pregnancy Project," A Film Focusing on Teen Pregnancy, Premieres on Lifetime

TIME - Healthland: The Pregnancy Project: Why One Girl Decided to Fake Her Baby Bump, by

Gaby Rodriguez' mother got pregnant for the first time at age 14. Her sisters got pregnant as teens too. Rodriguez decided to buck the trend — and get creative at the same time.

Last year, high school senior Gaby Rodriguez tucked a faux baby bump under her shirt and went to class. She attracted stares and the usual mean-spirited gossipy comments, all of which she jotted down. She then took her notes and parlayed them into a book, The Pregnancy Project, and a Lifetime movie of the same name that premieres on Jan. 28. . . .

Virginia Board of Health Holds Public Hearing on Abortion Regulations

CBS 6: Hearing could set permanent abortion regulations:

RICHMOND, Va. (WTVR) - The Virginia Board of Health will host a public hearing to discuss the future of regulations at Virginia abortion clinics Friday.

The state board will hear testimony from women's health advocates, medical experts, and legal experts as it looks to implement the second phase of the regulation process.

The board already approved far-reaching regulations last year on an emergency basis, but now will consider permanent regulations.

Arizona Congressman Leads Effort to Restrict Abortions in Washington D.C.

The Washington Post: Trent Franks leading effort to restrain abortion in D.C., by Mike DeBonis:

The District has been cast in a Capitol Hill morality play, thanks to Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) and the National Right to Life Committee.

Franks, with the backing of the activist group, is leading an effort to put new restrictions on abortions performed in the city via the “District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.” The bill, which Franks introduced Monday, would prohibit abortions 20 weeks post-fertilization.

It represents, as Franks put it, “a different angle of view” on the abortion issue as it relates to the District. Until now, Congress has generally limited its intervention to preventing the D.C. government from funding abortions with public money. The Franks bill goes further, seeking to ban some abortions regardless of who pays for them. . . .

Glenn Cohen on Sperm Donor Anonymity

I. Glenn Cohen (Harvard Law School) has posted Rethinking Sperm-Donor Anonymity:  Of Changed Selves, Non-Identity, and One-Night Stands on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In the United States, a movement urging legally prohibiting sperm-donor anonymity is rapidly gaining steam. In her forthcoming article in this journal, The New Kinship, and in her wonderful book, Test Tube Families, Naomi Cahn is among this movement’s most passionate and thoughtful supporters. She argues for mandatory sperm-donor registries of the type in place in Sweden, Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the Australian states of Victoria and Western Australia, the Netherlands, Norway, and, most recently, the United Kingdom and New Zealand. The UK system is typical in requiring new sperm (and egg) donors to put identifying information into a registry and providing that a donor-conceived child “is entitled to request and receive their donor’s name and last known address, once they reach the age of 18.”

In this Article, I explain why the arguments for these registries fail, using Cahn’s Article as my jumping off point.

I demonstrate four problems with the arguments she offers for eliminating anonymous sperm donation: (1) Her argument for harm to sperm donor and recipient parents fails in light of the availability of open-identity programs for those who want them, such that she imposes a one-size-fits-all solution where it would be better to let sperm donor and recipients parents choose for themselves. (2) Her argument for harm to children that result from anonymous sperm donation fails for reasons relating to the Non-Identity Problem. This portion of the Article summarizes work I have done elsewhere, most in-depth in Regulating Reproduction: The Problem With Best Interests, 96 Minn. L. Rev. _ (forthcoming, 2011), http://ssrn.com/abstract=1955292, and Beyond Best Interests, 96 Minn. L. Rev. _ (forthcoming, 2012 and up on SSRN soon). (3) She has sub silentio privileged analogies to adoption over analogies to coital reproduction. When the latter analogy is considered, her argument is weakened. I show this through a Swiftian Modest Proposal of a Misattributed-Paternity and One-Night-Stand Registry paralleling the one she defends for sperm donation. (4) The argument may not go far enough even on its own terms in endorsing only a “passive” registry in which children have to reach out to determine if they were donor conceived, rather than an “active” registry that would reach out to them. If we recoil from such active registries, that is a reason to re-examine the reasons in favor of the less effective passive ones.

For the reasons discussed, despite my admiration for this paper and all of Cahn’s work, I am not persuaded by the argument for adopting a mandatory sperm-donor identification registry of the kind in place elsewhere in the world. Indeed, I think these registries should be eliminated, not replicated. At a moment in which the idea of these registries is rapidly gaining popularity and attention in the United States, I hope my dissenting voice will be heeded.

Plaintiffs Seek En Banc Review of 5th Circuit TX Abortion Sonogram Ruling

Dallas Observer - Legal Battles Blog: Center For Reproductive Rights Wants All Fifth Circuit Judges To Hear Sonogram Law Case, by Anna Merlan:

The saga of Texas's brand-new, Rick-Perry approved sonogram law continues. First, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a preliminary injunction issued by Judge Sam Sparks and allowed the law to go into effect. (That law, just to refresh, requires women seeking an abortion to look at a sonogram, hear a description of the image and listen to a fetal heartbeat, whether or not she wants to hear or see any of those things or whether her doctor thinks it's necessary or prudent.) Then Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott was so excited about the whole thing he wanted the law to go into effect like immediately, a request the court granted in just one day. . . .

NJ Rep. Chris Smith Calls Obama ‘The Enemy of Life’

Huffington Post: Chris Smith: Obama Is 'The Enemey Of Life,' Appoints Pro-Abortion 'Death Peddlers' To Cabinet (VIDEO), by Nick Wing:

 

 

 

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) launched into an aggressive condemnation of President Barack Obama's stance on abortion this week, calling him the "enemy of life."

 

Speaking at the Washington, D.C. headquarters of Christian conservative group the Family Research Council on Monday, Smith warned the audience about the importance of defeating Obama in 2012.

 . . .

 

Conservative Spanish Government Plans to Tighten Abortion Law

AFP: Spain government 'plans abortion reform':

MADRID — Spain's conservative government plans to tighten the country's abortion law to oblige girls aged 16 and 17 seeking the procedure to have their parents' consent, its justice minister said Wednesday.

Alberto Ruiz-Gallardon said he was drawing up a bill to change the former Socialist government's 2010 law which fully legalised abortion up to 14 weeks of pregnancy. . . .

Study Confirms Abortion Far Less Risky Than Childbirth

TIME - Healthland: Why Abortion Is Less Risky than Childbirth, by Bonnie Rochman:

Abortions are considered high-risk, but a new study finds that the procedure is considerably safer than childbirth.

Abortion has a scary reputation, regardless of whether you’re for or against it. But the perception that it’s a high-risk procedure isn’t rooted in truth, according to new research.

Although more than half of states counsel women on the risks of abortion, a study published online Monday in Obstetrics & Gynecology finds that a legal abortion is actually far safer than giving birth.

The research discovered that women are actually 14 times more likely to die during or after delivery than as a result of complications from abortion. . . .

Doctors Without Borders Warns that up to 15,000 AIDS Victims in Congo May Die Within 3 Years

Voice of America: Thousands of AIDS Victims Face Death in Congo:

A medical aid group has warned that up to 15,000 AIDS victims in Democratic Republic of Congo could die in the next three years because of difficulty getting life-saving drugs.

The warning comes from Doctors Without Borders, which says access to health care for HIV and AIDS patients in Congo is “horrific.” It says 85 percent of an estimated 350,000 people who could benefit from antiretroviral drugs are not receiving them. . . .

11th Circuit to Hear Case of HIV-Positive Man Denied a Job by Atlanta Police Department

GA Voice: HIV-positive man not hired by Atlanta Police Department to have case heard in federal appeals court, by Dyana Bagby:

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday will hear the case of of a 37-year-old man who says the city of Atlanta called him a "direct threat" to others and he was denied a job with the Atlanta Police Department because he is HIV-positive.

Lambda Legal is representing the man, identified as "Richard Roe" in court documents to protect his identity.

A U.S. District Court ruled in favor of the city of Atlanta, saying the city did not discriminate against the HIV-positive man. Lambda Legal states that by calling Roe a "direct threat" the city did break federal law. . . .

Poll Finds Majority of Latina/o Population Favors Abortion Rights

The Florida Independent: New poll: Majority of Latina/o population supports reproductive rights, by Ashley Lopez:

A new survey released from the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health found that “strong majorities” of Latina/os registered to vote support “access to legal abortion, affirm that they would offer support to a close friend or family member who had an abortion, and oppose politicians interfering in personal, private decisions about abortion,” the group reports.

The research, which was conducted by Lake Research Partners, was part of a national survey of 600 registered Latina/o voters. The survey asked nuanced questions regarding abortion rights, questions were asked in English and Spanish and it included about 200 surveys conducted via cell phone. . . .

Wanda Nowicka on Sexual and Reproductive Rights and the Human Rights Agenda

Wanda Nowicka (Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning) has posted Sexual and Reproductive Rights and the Human Rights Agenda: Controversial and Contested on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In this paper I share some of my experience and observations, as an advocate for women's rights, of the last 20 years of struggles for sexual and reproductive health and rights, carried out in many key places where these issues have been debated and decided. I do not aspire to be comprehensive about the current status of human rights related to sexuality and reproduction. Given that my expertise is of a practical (rather than theoretical) nature, the complexity of the topic and contradictory events with regard to it, which take place almost everyday, I will highlight some selected achievements and setbacks in this area, particularly regarding abortion rights. I will provide examples of how human rights related to sexual and reproductive health have been addressed in UN policy-setting bodies, such as the Commission on the Status of Women and Commission on Population and Development, as well as in the UN human rights system such as Treaty Monitoring Bodies and Human Rights Council. Given my work with European institutions, I provide examples of important decisions by the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. Lastly, I discuss growing opposition to a progressive human rights agenda and the universality of human rights. Despite significant successes, sexual and reproductive rights will long remain controversial and contested. Hence, it is crucial to try to find new ways to engage and new partners to work with.

Massachusetts Appeals Court Overturns Order Requiring Forced Abortion and Sterilization of Mentally Ill Woman

MSNBC.com: Forced abortion for a mentally ill woman? No way, says Mass. appeals court, by Jame Eng:

A Massachusetts appeals court has verbally skewered a judge who ordered that a mentally ill woman have an abortion against her will even if it meant she had to be “coaxed, bribed, or even enticed” into a hospital.

The Massachusetts Appeals Court this week overturned the ruling by Norfolk Probate Judge Christina L. Harms, who had also ordered that the 32-year-old woman, known as “Mary Moe,” be sterilized. . . .

Benjamin Meier and Alicia Yamin on Right to Health Litigation and HIV/AIDS Policy

Benjamin Mason Meier (UNC-Chapel Hill) and Alicia Ely Yamin have posted Right to Health Litigation and HIV/AIDS Policy on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This article sketches the evolving interaction between human rights case law and HIV/AIDS policy. To clarify the need for such analysis, this article discusses the promise of human rights litigation in providing accountability for state public health commitments. Given the promise of this litigation in realizing public health outcomes, this article reviews the origins and development of human rights jurisprudence for HIV/AIDS. With this enforcement movement facing increasing criticism for distorting the global health governance agenda, the authors examine the backlash against this human rights jurisprudence in setting HIV/AIDS policy. This article concludes that scholars and practitioners must engage in comparative analyses of these rights-based litigation strategies and empirical research on their public health impacts. . . .

On 39th Anniversary, Roe v. Wade More Embattled Than Ever

The Huffington Post: Women Are Watching On Anniversary of Roe, by Cecile Richards (President, Planned Parenthood Action Fund):

On the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, women are watching, and they are angry at what they see.

On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed every woman's right to make her own medical decisions without government interference. At the time, the Supreme Court recognized the inherent right to privacy for women, an urgent issue given that women were dying in emergency rooms across the country from self-induced abortions.

But today, women across the nation are disturbed to see a set of politicians doing everything they can to undermine this landmark decision that has stood as a critical safeguard for women's health for four decades. . . .

Marking Roe v. Wade Anniversary, Obama Promises to Protect Choice

The White House: Statement by the President on Roe v. Wade Anniversary:

As we mark the 39^th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.  I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.  While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption.  And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

Pamela Laufer-Ukeles on Reproductive Choices and Informed Consent

Pamela Laufer-Ukeles (University of Dayton - School of Law) has posted Reproductive Choices and Informed Consent: Fetal Interests, Women's Identity and Relational Autonomy on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

In this Article, I describe and examine the severe shortcomings in women’s autonomy in the context of reproductive choices in the medical arena. The reproductive choices I explore are those choices that involve gestation: abortion, fertility treatments, and interventions during pregnancy. Due to state and medical interests in the fetus, I describe how information conveyed to patients making reproductive choices is biased towards fetal interests, relies on female stereotypes, and is still conveyed with the objective authority of the medical profession. Moreover, reproductive choices implicate women’s values and identity interests that reach beyond medical concerns, which are not part of the informed consent doctrine at all. The narrow, individualistic informed consent torts doctrine intended to protect patient autonomy does not do enough in this context to balance bias nor does it mandate discussion of important identity interests and values. Accordingly, I argue that when faced with reproductive choices, women are not provided the balanced and comprehensive information needed to promote their autonomy.

In response to the breakdown in patient autonomy I describe, instead of leaving women alone to make choices or regulating in order to protect them from their choices, a broader framework for supporting reproductive choices should be established. In light of the interdependence of woman and fetus, as well as the broader social context shaping these decisions, I argue that a more contextual, relational perspective of autonomy should be the goal of informed consent in the context of reproductive choices. I suggest a number of reforms that aim to optimize patient autonomy from a relational perspective. I suggest a broad, deliberative doctor-patient consultation and legal reforms that create more balance between the pull towards intervention and fetal protection on the one hand, and non-intervention and protection of women’s personal identity interests on the other.

Report Finds Unsafe Abortions Are Increasing Globally and Bans Are Not Reducing Abortions

The Guardian: Unsafe abortions rising globally, by Sarah Boseley:

The number of unsafe abortions is rising around the world, while what appeared to be a steady decline in abortion rates in the 1990s has stalled, according to an authoritative new report.

The analysis from the Guttmacher Institute in the US, which looks at trends since other major global analyses in 1995 and 2003, will dismay both campaigners against abortion and those who fight for improved maternal health. . . .

Here is a link to the report.

NPR Talk of the Nation with Guest Nancy Northup, President and CEO of Center for Reproductive Rights, on Evolution of Abortion Battle

NPR -Talk of the Nation: Abortion Rights Advocates, Opponents' Tactics Evolve:

In recent years abortion rights opponents have stepped up efforts to challenge Roe vs. Wade, the nearly 40-year-old Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion. Many states have adopted new laws restricting abortion rights since 2010, putting abortion rights supporters on the defensive. . . .

ACLU on Obama Administration's Contraceptive Coverage Decision

As a defender of both religious liberty and reproductive freedom, the ACLU brings particular credibility and expertise to this issue.

The Washington Post - On Faith Blog: Birth control decision defends religious liberty, by Louise Melling (Director, ACLU Center for Liberty):

Recognizing the importance of birth control to women’s health and lives, the Obama administration stood firm today against the political strong-arming of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and other religious groups that oppose contraception. This is a major victory for women’s health that we should all celebrate. But the path to today’s victory was not a foregone conclusion.

Last summer, following the recommendation of a non-partisan panel of medical experts, the Department of Health and Human Services issued guidelines requiring new insurance plans to cover contraceptives. The bishops, the political arm of the Catholic Church, immediately cried foul, claiming a right to use their religious beliefs to discriminate against millions of women of all faiths who use contraception. . . .