Every year, anti-choice state legislators propose measures intended to restrict women's access to abortion,
including mandatory delays, biased counseling provisions and other
burdensome and unnecessary requirements. On average, more than six
hundred bills are proposed annually and dozens are passed, making it
increasingly difficult for women in many states to access abortion. This year has been one of the most challenging state legislative sessions for women's access to abortion in many years. States considered and enacted some of the most extreme restrictions on abortion
in recent memory, as well as passing laws creating dozens of other
significant new hurdles. At the same time, pro-choice legislators,
advocates and governors continued to stand up for women's health and
rights and in many cases defeated harmful legislation. As we begin to
assess the impact of the 2010 session on women's access to reproductive healthcare, the Center offers this preliminary recap of some of the major trends and most onerous laws enacted this session.
For those facing infertility, using assisted reproductive technology to have genetically related children is a very expensive proposition. In particular, to produce a live birth through in vitro fertilization (IVF) will cost an individual (on average) between $66,667 and $114,286 in the U.S. If forced to pay these prices out of pocket, many would be unable to afford this technology. Given this reality, a number of states have attempted to improve access to reproductive technology through state-level insurance mandates that cover IVF. Several scholars, however, have worried that increasing access in this way will cause a diminution in adoptions and have argued against enactment of state mandates for that reason.
In this paper, which was selected for presentation at the 2010 Stanford-Yale Junior Faculty Forum, we push against that conclusion on two fronts.
First, we interrogate the normative premises of the argument and expose its contestable implicit assumptions about how the state should balance the interests of existing children waiting for adoption and those seeking access to reproductive technology in order to have genetically related children.
Second, we investigate the unexamined empirical question behind the conclusion: does state subsidization of reproductive technologies through insurance mandates actually reduce adoption; that is, is there a trade-off between helping individuals conceive and helping children waiting to be adopted? We call the claim that there is such an effect the “substitution theory.” Using the differential timing of introduction of state-level insurance mandates relating to IVF in some states and differences in the forms these mandates take, we employ several different econometric techniques (differences-in-differences, ordinary least squares, two-stage least squares) to examine the effect of these mandates on IVF utilization and adoption. Contrary to the assumption of the substitution theory, we find no strong evidence that state support of IVF through these mandates crowds out either domestic or international adoption.
Even if you just wanted Glenn Beck and his over-publicized rally to
go away, please take a minute to read what African American clergy, and
civil rights and women's health leaders have to say. It's important.
This past weekend, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice
(RCRC) brought together leaders of the African American community to
expose a little-noticed aspect of the Beck event - the attempt to use
the legacy of the civil rights movement to undermine African American
women's reproductive rights. Alveda King figures prominently in this
scheme - with her ludicrous charges of abortion as "black genocide" and
her comparison of anti-choice activists to Freedom Riders. . . .
The National Institutes of Health Monday ordered all of its
researchers conducting research on human embryonic stem cells to
immediately halt their experiments.
The move came in response to a temporary injunction issued last week
by a federal judge barring the federal government from funding research
involving human embryonic stem cells. The judge ruled that the research
violated a federal law banning the federal government from funding any
research involving the destruction of human embryos. . . .
Abortion rights advocates and opponents are using that state's regulations for clinics to make their case.
RICHMOND -- Virginia's continuing debate over abortion has turned to the south -- as in South Carolina.
When Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a legal opinion
this month that the state can regulate first-trimester abortion
providers, he invoked a federal court ruling that upheld a South
Carolina law requiring abortion clinics to meet hospital-like standards. . . .
Wal-Mart Stores asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to review the largest employment discrimination lawsuit in American history, involving more than a million women workers, current and former, at Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club stores.
Nine years after the suit was filed, the central issue before the Supreme Court will not be whether any discrimination occurred, but whether more than a million people can even make this joint claim through a class-action lawsuit, as opposed to filing claims individually or in smaller groups.
In April, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco ruled 6-5 that the lawsuit could proceed as a jumbo class action — the fourth judicial decision upholding a class action. . . .
LOOKING back on the adoption of the 19th Amendment 90 years ago Thursday — the largest act of enfranchisement in our history — it can be hard to see what the fuss was about. We’re inclined to assume that the passage of women’s suffrage (even the term is old-fashioned) was inevitable, a change whose time had come. After all, voting is now business as usual for women. And although women are still poorly represented in Congress, there are influential female senators and representatives, and prominent women occupy governors’ and mayors’ offices and legislative seats in every part of the United States.
Yet entrenched opposition nationwide sidelined the suffrage movement for decades in the 19th century. By 1920, antagonism remained in the South, and was strong enough to come close to blocking ratification. . . .
Half of all pregnancies end in miscarriages, usually in the first couple of weeks, before a woman even knows that she is pregnant. A miscarriage destroys an embryo. If you believe that every embryo is the moral equivalent of a fully-formed human being, miscarriages are like a perpetual natural disaster like a flood or an earthquake, and you should be urging a massive effort to reduce miscarriages as the best way to save millions of human lives a year. As far as I know, there is no such effort going on in the United States or elsewhere. . . .
A study by two Children’s Hospital
doctors has found that Google searches on “abortion” rise in areas with
more conservative abortion policies or where the procedure is less
available.
Dr. Ben Reis and Dr. John Brownstein of Children’s Hospital Boston
Infomatics Program reviewed the abortion rates and policies in 50 states
and 37 countries and compared the information against the number of
Internet searches for the word “abortion.”
They found more searches in states and countries with more
restrictive policies or less access to abortion and lower abortion
rates. . . .
It's a question that has perplexed philosophers, theologians and scientists for thousands of years.
Pythagorean Greeks, early Christian church fathers, Talmudic rabbis, Sunni and Shia thinkers, Hindu brahmin and modern bioethicists have grappled with the fundamental, ultimately unknowable, mystery: At what point in our biological development are we infused with a soul? At what point do we become human?
On May 14, the final day of their legislative session, Missouri lawmakers declared the answer, and last month, by withholding his veto, Gov. Jay Nixon signaled that he agreed. On Aug. 28, their answer will become the law of the land.
"The life of each human being begins at conception," according to Senate Bill 793, which will add new regulations to the state's 24-hour informed consent law for abortions. "Abortion will terminate the life of a separate, unique, living human being."
Those words will be displayed "prominently" on brochures that abortion providers will be required to hand out to every woman seeking the procedure — even if they don't happen to believe the Christian theology the words represent. . . .
You can outsource just about any work to India these days, including making babies. Reproductive tourism in India is now a half-a-billion-dollar-a-year industry, with surrogacy services offered in 350 clinics across the country since it was legalized in 2002. The primary appeal of India is that it is cheap, hardly regulated, and relatively safe. Surrogacy can cost up to $100,000 in the United States, while many Indian clinics charge $22,000 or less. Very few questions are asked. Same-sex couples, single parents and even busy women who just don't have time to give birth are welcomed by doctors. As a bonus, many Indians speak English and Indian surrogate mothers are less likely to use illegal drugs. Plus medical standards in private hospitals are very high (not all good Indian doctors left in the brain drain). . . .
On Tuesday, August 17th the Washington State Board of Pharmacy made
it official. They intend to revise the rules on pharmacy refusal in the
state. From Planned Parenthood Votes Washington:
On Tuesday, August 17th, the Washington State Board of Pharmacy
(BOP) issued an official notice that they intend to make a new pharmacy
rule and end the requirement that pharmacies dispense medications
without discrimination or delay.
We've previously reported
on the events leading up to the board's decision to revisit its own
rule that pharmacies must fill all prescriptions, including emergency
contraception, and preparing to defend that position in court.
Sali Hughes doesn't judge women who give birth in hospitals, so why, she argues, can't people accept her decision to opt for a home birth? For most women like her, who gave birth to both sons at home, it is a safe and entirely natural process
Just under three years ago, I was 39 weeks pregnant with my second child, sitting in front of the TV watching an Al Pacino interview, with a shepherd's pie resting atop my bump, when my waters broke. Less than two hours later, two NHS midwives packed up their medical paraphernalia and left me in my own bed, in clean pyjamas, my favourite mug of tea in one hand and a contentedly breastfeeding baby boy in the other. It was probably the most blissfully happy moment of my life. . . .
RICHMOND -- Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II has concluded that the state can impose
stricter oversight over clinics that perform abortions, a move
immediately decried by abortion-rights organizations and others as an
attempt to circumvent the General Assembly, which has repeatedly
rejected similar measures.
Cuccinelli's legal opinion empowers the Board of Health, if it chooses, to require the clinics to
meet hospital-type standards. Abortion-rights advocates say that could
force some clinics to close because they would be unable to afford to
meet the new requirements. . . .
In a setback to the Obama administration’s efforts to
expand stem cell research, a judge has issued a preliminary injunction
blocking the federal government from funding any medical research that
involves embryonic stem cells. In his ruling, U.S. chief district court
judge Royce Lamberth cited a law that bans the use of federal dollars
for research in which an embryo is destroyed.
A federal judge on Monday blocked the Obama administration from funding
human embryonic stem cell research, ruling that the support violates a
federal law barring the use of taxpayer money for experiments that
destroy human embryos.
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth issued a preliminary injunction
that prohibits the National Institutes of Health from funding the
research under the administration's new guidelines, citing an appeals
court's ruling that the researchers who had challenged the
less-restrictive policy have the legal standing to pursue their lawsuit.
The decision, a setback for one of the administration's most
high-profile scientific policies, was praised by opponents of the
research. . . .
For the past two years, Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has been using video-conferencing and a remote-controlled drawer to dispense abortion pills to women seeking early abortions in Iowa clinics. Operation Rescue is taking aim at the practice, charging that because these medication abortions are not “performed by a physician,” they violate Iowa law.
This claim doesn’t stand up. True, medication abortion straddles the line between procedure and prescription: while the physician only acts insofar as giving a woman two pills, the more significant part of the procedure is the counseling that precedes it. But this is exactly the point: the medication abortion “procedure” requires the counsel and knowledge of a health care provider—and these days, we do not have to be physically present to share knowledge and expertise. The digital age has removed countless barriers to information, particularly geographic barriers. Why shouldn’t digital technology also remove barriers to health care. . . .
The Wisconsin Journal of Law, Gender & Society Announces our 2011 Symposium: Gender, Justice, & Victim Rights: A Gendered Perspective of Victims in the Criminal Justice System
February 25, 2011 University of Wisconsin Law School Madison, Wisconsin
We are seeking original scholarship, from both scholars and practitioners, that addresses the intersections of law and gender in the role and treatment of victims in the criminal justice system. Interested parties should send an abstract to WJLGS.Symposium@gmail.com by October 31, 2010. Those selected for the Symposium will be notified by December 2010. The Journal’s Symposium issue will be published in Winter 2011.
Questions may be addressed to Symposium Editor Erin Welsh at ebwelsh@wisc.edu.
SATARA, India — Sunita Laxman Jadhav is a door-to-door saleswoman who sells waiting. She sweeps along muddy village lanes in her nurse’s white sari, calling on newly married couples with an unblushing proposition: Wait two years before getting pregnant, and the government will thank you.
It also will pay you.
“I want to tell you about our honeymoon package,” began Ms. Jadhav, an auxiliary nurse, during a recent house call on a new bride in this farming region in the state of Maharashtra. Ms. Jadhav explained that the district government would pay 5,000 rupees, or about $106, if the couple waited to have children. Waiting, she promised, would allow them time to finish their schooling or to save money.
Waiting also would allow India more time to curb a rapidly growing population that threatens to turn its demography from a prized asset into a crippling burden. With almost 1.2 billion people, India is disproportionately young; roughly half the population is younger than 25. . . .
Germany's Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that registered same-sex partners should receive the same inheritance rights as married couples. According to theAssociated Press, the court decided yesterday in favor of two plaintiffs who had lost their partners and were forced to pay an inheritance tax similar to those paid by distant relatives.
"The Constitutional Court ruled that there was not a significant enough difference between married spouses and registered life partners to justify discrimination against the latter," court spokeswoman Judith Blohm told Deutsche Welle. The court has given the German government until 2011 to compensate those penalized under the unconstitutional inheritance law, according toReuters. . . .
There was a time when Becky Thurmond Fowler neglected to take her birth control pills for days on end. But she didn’t worry, because she and her husband, Dan, wanted to have a child at some point. “It wouldn’t have been the end of the world if I got pregnant,” she said.
That attitude changed after Ms. Fowler had a daughter, Emerson, now 2 1/2. But with a new baby demanding all her attention, Ms. Fowler, now 33, found herself becoming even more forgetful about taking the pills. Soon she began to worry about the possibility of an unexpected pregnancy: “We were just rolling the dice.”
Many women struggle to find a birth control strategy that is effective given their particular circumstances. About half of all pregnancies — three million annually — are unintended. . . .
SATARA, India — Sunita Laxman Jadhav is a door-to-door saleswoman who sells waiting. She sweeps along muddy village lanes in her nurse’s white sari, calling on newly married couples with an unblushing proposition: Wait two years before getting pregnant, and the government will thank you.
The National Institutes of Health Monday ordered all of its researchers conducting research on human embryonic stem cells to immediately halt their experiments.
It's a question that has perplexed philosophers, theologians and scientists for thousands of years.
RICHMOND -- Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II has concluded that the state can impose stricter oversight over clinics that perform abortions, a move immediately decried by abortion-rights organizations and others as an attempt to circumvent the General Assembly, which has repeatedly rejected similar measures.
In a setback to the Obama administration’s efforts to expand stem cell research, a judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the federal government from funding any medical research that involves embryonic stem cells. In his ruling, U.S. chief district court judge Royce Lamberth cited a law that bans the use of federal dollars for research in which an embryo is destroyed.
Germany's Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that registered same-sex partners should receive the same inheritance rights as married couples. According to theAssociated Press, the court decided yesterday in favor of two plaintiffs who had lost their partners and were forced to pay an inheritance tax similar to those paid by distant relatives.
