Results matching “american pregnancy association”
A new kind of emergency contraception, ellaOne, works to prevent pregnancy up to five days after unprotected sex.
The EC sold in the U.S. is levonorgestrel, sold under the brand name Plan B; ellaOne is the drug ulipristal acetate, and it's only available in Europe. Though it's limited availability hasn't stopped anti-choicers in the U.S. from laying the groundwork for a fight.
Donna Harrison, president of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, says that "this is a thinly-veiled attempt to get an abortion drug over-the-counter." A headline from LifeNews says the drug "causes abortions."
UK anti-choicers are chiming in as well, like Joanne Hill from the organization LIFE, who says that "more casual sex and more unintended pregnancy will inevitably be the result" of ellaOne.
Obviously, these are all the same arguments we heard when the FDA was considering approving Plan B for over-the-counter status, and the "it will make girls slutty" line is one we're familiar with from EC and Gardasil battles.
So while I'm happy to know ellaOne is effective, I'm not holding my breath for it to be introduced - or made available anytime soon - in the U.S.
Anything you say, oh divine one!
Abstinence-only education advocates are not too pleased that their federal funding is pretty much kaput (though I'm still keeping my eye on that "teen pregnancy prevention" money). In fact, they are freaking out.
Leslee Unruh, president of the National Abstinence Clearinghouse and all-around fun person to watch lose their shit, had this to say about losing federal funding:
"We've got news for the condom worshipers, abstinence education is not going away any time soon. Taxpayers will not tolerate their money being used for ideological latex-only programs and the molestation of their children's minds and future."
You know, this is why folks in the virginity movement need to rebrand their image - they can't help but reveal how radical and on the fringe they are. Most American parents want their children taught about contraception; most American women will use contraception at some point in their lives. Calling the majority of the country - who want their kids to learn medically accurate information about sex so they can make healthy decisions - condom worshipers and molesters is simply stupid.
That's why the more media-savvy abstinence-only leaders are now using more mainstream-friendly language and attempting to frame themselves as folks interested in "holisitic approaches" and "healthy lifestyle choices." In fact, last night I was on the Alan Colmes radio show (link forthcoming) debating Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA) - and Huber continued to claim that abstinence-only education did teach kids about contraception and gave them all the information they needed to make healthy decisions. It was bullshit sound bite heaven, and it was desperate. (She also referred to comprehensive sex education as condom-only or condom-centered a couple of times; classy.)
While I'm glad to see that these organizations are scrambling, I'm also a bit wary of writing them off completely - sadly, I don't think we've seen the end of Huber or Unruh. And we have to continue to be vigilant on a state and community level. Even now, in California, there's an abstinence-only debate ranging in Sonoma County schools.
So, please, keep up-to-date on what's happening with ab-only nonsense - make sure to check out Advocates for Youth's Amplify and SIECUS (in addition to us, of course!).
Thanks to Rebecca for the link.
Don't act like you don't love this track.
It is appalling that for a culture as saturated with sex as ours, it is in the arena of education that certain groups want the most censorship and control. Perhaps because it is one institution that parents can have some control over through PTAs, charters and community organizations. It is unfortunate that what is being taught in school isn't matching up to the level at which youth internalize the sex in the media and have sexual experiences whether it be with peers, through pornography, video games or watching movies. Whatever it is, youth are exposed to sex and have a variety of sexual experiences. It is unfortunate that it is not therefore discussed honestly in school.
So I was excited to see this article in the Boston Globe about a church community that teaches real sex ed, you know, the kind that talks about sex.
A joint effort by the Unitarian Universalist Association and the United Church of Christ, OWL aims to help teens understand sexuality. As Detwiler recalls the sessions of three years ago, the pictures demonstrating what sexual intercourse looks like were "shocking to kids, but also helpful. It helped them to grasp another dimension of sexuality." So did the frank discussions about dating norms, the chance to pass around condoms, and informal conversation about the way sex is portrayed in magazines, movies, and music. OWL is among a handful of sex-ed programs that take a position more radical than it may, at first, sound: namely, that sexuality education should actually talk about sex. While events like the spike in teen pregnancies in Gloucester last year or the bulging bellies of youthful pop stars (or Alaskan first daughters) can prompt outcries for better sex ed, most of what we call "sex education" is really about preventing the bad stuff. As one Newton teacher puts it, "It's all been reduced to two issues: teen pregnancy and STDs. That's all really important, but I feel we're losing other important things."
Check out the rest here. This stuff makes sense! Yesterday in the Yes means Yes live chat we got into a conversation about sex education teaching youth that their body can be for pleasure and the fear that that promotes among some parents that this is somehow "pro-sex" or "pornographic." Let's face it, youth are going to do exactly what you are "afraid" of. It is an unfortunate reality that many Americans are afraid of sex that is for the purpose of pleasure, yet our media is obsessed with sexuality (often to the point of sexualizing women.) Schizophrenia anyone?
RELATED:
One more time with feeling: Virginity pledges don't work.
Knocked up by Gossip Girl?
Abstinence shocker: Engaged couples don't want to forgo sex.
Pure lies: Inaugural Edition
Time Magazine hearts Purity Balls
The hypocrisy of abstinence-only education.
This one is a doozy. Via RH Reality Check, we find that the American Pregnancy Association is not only linked to crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), but was originally one itself. Heather Corinna of Scarleteen did the research:
According to the 1999 site archive, the Helpline was established by Mike and Anne Sheaffer in 1995. The couple advertised their desire to adopt a baby on two billboards in Dallas and set up a hotline to respond to the calls from pregnant women the billboards provoked. . . The Schaeffers started the CPC called America's Crisis Pregnancy Helpline in 1995; that CPC was later renamed America's Pregnancy Helpline. In 2003, that organization spawned the American Pregnancy Association. Both the Helpline and the APA continued to exist, ostensibly as separate entities; in reality, at one call center, at the same address.(Emphasis mine)
Corinna discovered this when she unknowingly referred an inquiring teen to the APA's American Pregnancy Helpline and later did some digging only to find more than enough information to link them to anti-choice resources. The sites themselves are suspect enough, using language like "partial birth abortion" and giving implications that breast cancer and infertility could be side effects. And calling the Helpline resulted in the anticipated result; the operator refused to give a Scarleteen volunteer any referrals to abortion services, but gave her a number to a local CPC.
The scariest thing about this is that the reproductive health community at large has been in the dark about this, with many reproductive rights organizations linking to APA on their websites obviously without knowledge of its history, including the popular Medline Plus, which is a project of the National Library of Medicine. The thing is that at first glance, the website offers all accurate information; it's the most insidious of efforts I've seen from a CPC. And I don't doubt we will only find more.
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick declared domestic violence a "public health emergency."
Women police officers in Detroit fight for paid maternity leave.
Given epidemic levels of sexual violence against women of color, why is it not considered an epidemic?
MADRE explains the connection between women and the global food crisis.
Colorado may have an abortion ban on the November ballot.
Get your mind ready for bikini season.
The abstinence-only juggernaut gears up for a major lobbying effort.
I'd forgotten all about Daria!
Heba blogs from Gaza… the whole world might not be listening, but some of us certainly are.
More on why John McCain would be disastrous for women's rights.
How the cost of infertility treatments effectively shuts low-income women out of motherhood.
...well, in most states, anyway. Via Jennifer Block (author of Pushed), I see that Missouri -- where certified midwives can be charged as felons for simply doing their jobs -- is debating legislation that would legalize midwife-assisted birth.
Even as midwifery grows increasingly popular nationwide, with an estimated 40,000 babies born outside hospitals last year, a handful of states remain severely restrictive of the profession. In nine states, including Illinois, Iowa and Indiana, some forms of midwifery are illegal, though not a felony. Missouri, the only state where midwives can be charged as felons, has long been the most hostile to the practice of midwifery, though hundreds of families like the Kerrs rely on an underground network of midwives who quietly operate outside the law.Now Missouri finds itself in the national spotlight on the issue. A state lawmaker, whose wife was aided in a pregnancy by a midwife, pushed through legislation this year that would allow midwives to practice freely in the state, and Gov. Matt Blunt signed the bill into law. But opponents quickly filed a lawsuit to overturn it, state courts ordered an injunction, and the law cannot go into effect until the Missouri Supreme Court rules on its legality, probably early next year.
If even uber-conservative Gov. Matt Blunt is in favor of decriminalizing midwife births, then who, you might ask, is against the legislation? The answer, though the article manages to completely gloss over it, is advocacy groups like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Missouri State Medical Association, which represent the interests of doctors. Not pregnant women and their families.
For more on related issues, see Sarah Blustain's review of Pushed and Born in the USA for the Women's Review of Books.
The ACLU has a Mother's Day action to push for ratification of CEDAW -- the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.
Caryl Rivers explains how the media perpetuate women's fear of being a bad mother.
It's still taboo to say you have no interest in ever becoming a mother.
Can GPS devices be used to stop abusers?
Yes, the marriage-industrial complex really has gotten this out of control.
Most women who seek abortions in China aren't being forced to comply with the "one child" policy, they're young and single.
Giuliani, who said overturning Roe would "be OK" in the May 3 debate, is now supposedly a pro-choice candidate.
Papa Ratzi, on his papal visit to Brazil, endorses the excommunication of Catholics who endorse pro-choice policies -- with language so strong that the Vatican toned down the transcript of his speech
Why the former head of Catholics for a Free Choice, Frances Kissling, hearts Roe. And why she stayed silent on the issue of "partial-birth" abortion -- until now.
Dahlia Lithwick on why women shouldn't apologize -- or feel stupid -- for taking internet harassment seriously.
Feminist Souad Sbai calls for more rights for muslim women who immigrate to Europe.
Why aren't pro-choice Democrats pushing to repeal the Hyde Amendment?
Reviewing the latest model kidnapping-torture flick.
The American Psychological Association evaluates "post-abortion syndrome."
Some states move to increase regulation of crisis-pregnancy centers.
Randall Tobias, who pushed abstinence programs abroad and was revealed to enjoy "massages" from DC sexworkers, is not the first public abstinence advocate to violate the strict moral code he touted.
The situation for women in Iraq grows ever worse.
The divorce rate is at its lowest since 1970. Probably because people are getting married later, or choosing just to live together instead.
The Texas legislature officially overrules the governor's HPV vaccination mandate. And New Hampshire has avoided controversy by not making the vaccine required for school entry, but instead making it free. And the strategy seems to be working.
Plus, there have been conflicting messages in recent reporting about the effectiveness of the HPV vaccine.
Iranian women's rights activists are seen as "Trojan horses" of Western influence, which makes it hard for them to accept help from Western advocacy groups. It's also hard for the NGOs, which don't want to be seen as pushing for military intervention for regime change in Iran.
Kansas nixes abstinence-only sex ed. And Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick calls for an end to abstinence-only education in his state.
A poll commissioned by a national abstinence organization shows that parents would rather see sex ed that emphasizes abstinence but also teaches about contraception. Which is... comprehensive sex ed. The no-sex-until-hetero-marriage crowd is erroneously touting this as public support for abstinence-only programs.
Meanwhile, a Florida school -- which contracts with a crisis-pregnancy center to provide its sex ed -- brings in an abstinence-only speaker, then releases a flier calling it an "abstinence rally." Parents are pissed.
The high cost of America's hyper-masculine culture.
Plan B has been over-the-counter (kinda) for nearly a year, but has access really expanded? ACOG reports access varies greatly from state to state.
Rebecca Traister writes a mash note to Jane Fonda.
A new Iranian film is about women who dress up as boys in order to be allowed in to watch a soccer match.
Parents of Down syndrome children are reaching out to other parents who find out (via a prenatal test) that they are pregnant with a Down syndrome child. Dana responds here, and Salon's Peter Birkenhead weighs in with a moving post about he and his wife's decision to abort.
Kerrita McClaughlyn (left) and colleagues at the International Diabetes Federation’s 19th World Diabetes Congress in Cape Town, South Africa in December 2006.
Kerrita McClaughlyn is the media relations coordinator of the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) based in Brussels, Belgium. For over 50 years, IDF has been at the forefront of global diabetes advocacy. The Federation is committed to raising global awareness of diabetes, promoting adequate diabetes care and prevention, and encouraging activities towards finding a cure for the different types of diabetes that many people are not aware of.
Kerrita answered my questions over email. Here’s Kerrita…
Katherine Arnoldi wrote her first article about equal rights for teen moms in a magazine called Hard Labor in 1976. She has won numerous literary awards since then. And her graphic novel, The Amazing True Story of a Teenage Single Mom, published in 1998, was named one of the top ten books of the year by Entertainment Weekly, was awarded two American Library Association Awards, and is being made into a major motion picture.
Katherine Arnoldi became a single mother when she was 17, living in Canton, Ohio in the 1970s. The Amazing True Story of a Teenage Single Mom chronicles Katherine’s journey through abusive relationships, toxic factory work, and the backlash she received as a single teen mom, to a college education at the University of Arkansas. Katherine has been advocating for the rights of teen moms to education and mobility ever since. And is currently a doctoral candidate in creative writing at Binghamton University in New York.
Busy Katherine emailed me her answers to my questions. Here’s Katherine…
A new report published in the American Journal of Public Health says that “despite an increased need for reproductive health services among incarcerated women who are at risk for STDs and pregnancy, they are often underserved in receipt of reproductive health and family planning services.�
Women in prison are at higher risk for STDs and unplanned pregnancies:
The majority of the growing number of women who are incarcerated are released within a few days or weeks, when they may again be exposed to STDs and become pregnant unintentionally.In a survey of 484 incarcerated women, Dr. Jennifer G. Clarke and colleagues at the Rhode Island Hospital in Providence found that more than two-thirds reported inconsistent birth control, 38 percent had multiple sex partners and more than 83 percent had a history of unplanned pregnancy.
Most of the 18- to 35-year-old women surveyed said they would likely have sexual relations with a man within six months of release from prison.
The study also found that incarcerated women were more likely to use birth control when it was offered by the prison:
Thirty-nine percent of jailed women started birth control when it was offered before their release, while only 4 percent took advantage of free birth control offered at a community health center after their release.
Of course, women in prison being treated poorly (especially when it comes to repro rights) isn’t exactly news. For more information, check out the Women’s Prison Association.
Researchers have found that hormonal changes during pregnancy do not protect women from depression, and suggest that women should not stop taking their antidepressants during pregnancy, despite the possiblity of birth defects.
The study was published in this week’s Journal of the American Medical Association, and also says that researchers have not found that antidepressants lead to major birth defects, despite some reports that suggest a possible tie between certain drugs and heart malformation.
Anyone know more about this? Thoughts?
In other choice/teen news: make sure to check out The New Republic's article on all the recent brouhaha surrounding emergency contraception, Morning-After Sickness. Outside of discussing legislative threats, author Jonathan Cohn also takes on the fear of teen sex that seems to be behind much of the opposition to EC:
The other serious argument against Plan B is that it will increase risky sexual activity by young people. But peer-reviewed studies published in mainstream medical publications (like one just published in the Journal of the American Medical Association) have repeatedly found no such link. Of course, conservatives argue that making emergency contraception available sends a broader cultural message about the acceptability of premarital sex...
...When conservatives talk about Plan B, they conjure up images of lust-crazed college girls engaging in one-night stands, then reaching over empty beer bottles to grab their supersized Plan B jars. But the one group to whom emergency contraception would make the greatest difference is rape victims. According to Trussell, who studied statistics from 1998, about 22,000 of the 25,000 women who became pregnant from rape could have prevented pregnancy with emergency contraception. Unfortunately, the new federal hospital guidelines for rape treatment released in January mysteriously omitted Plan B, even though a previous draft had included it. In Colorado, conservatives have fought efforts to impose a guideline that includes emergency contraceptives...
I'm glad that Cohn points out that women who are suffering most because of the lack of EC availability are rape victims and not crazy spring breakers, as the conservatives would have us believe. But don't crazy spring breakers deserve EC, too? By focusing on victims of sexual assault as the primary users of emergency contraception are we somehow bolstering the argument that "irresponsible" teen girls shouldn't have access to it? Just putting it out there...
The Washington Post reported that nine activists were arrested yesterday for protesting the FDA's position on the morning after pill.
The ladies gathered outside of the Health & Human Services Building and demanded to speak with Steven Galson, the FDA asshole who rejected the application for Plan B to be sold over the counter. While they didn't get a meeting with Mr. Galson, they did manage to send a strong message--WE ARE WILLING TO GO TO JAIL TO PROTECT OUR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS. Right on, ladies!
These activists are getting some new institutional support as well. Earlier this week Vanessa discussed a recent study by the American Medical Association which revealed that use of the morning after pill *does not* lead to an increase in pregnancy rates, promote unprotected sex or cause women to give up their regular birth control (contrary to what all the anti's like to promote). Yesterday, the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists jumped on board, calling for the FDA to approve Plan B's new application, further noting that greater access emergency contraception could cut the rate of unintended pregnancies in *half*.
While I'm keeping my fingers crossed about Round 2 at the FDA, given the current political climate, it's hard not to feel cynical.
So, good or bad, are you ready for the FDA's decision? AND are you ready for the anniversary of Roe v. Wade?
If your calendar is empty on January 22nd, check out Planned Parenthood's 32 Ways to Commemorate 32 years of Reproductive Freedom. *AND* be sure to let feministing know how *you* plan to celebrate your reproductive rights.
According to a new study just released by the American Medical Association, Plan B --a form of emergency contraception -- does not lead to an increase in pregnancy rates, an increase in unprotected sex or cause women to give up their regular birth control, reports Women’s eNews yesterday.
The study released by the American Medical Association showed that women with the most access to EC were more likely to use it, but that didn’t lead changes in their sexual behavior compared to subjects whose access was more restricted. These findings are strong evidence against anti-EC policymakers who claim that making it that accessible will lead to misuse of the medication.
This information was released just two weeks before the Food and Drug Administration is due to (finally) make a decision on whether Plan B should be sold over-the-counter -- but only for women 16 and older. Should we be surprised? Actually, yes. As Jessica said in a past post on Plan B-- if you want to prevent teen pregnancy, shouldn’t you want young teenagers to have access to this pill? Just another contradiction in the world o’ conserves.
As of now, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Maine, New Mexico and Washington are the only 6 states in the country that allow over-the-counter sales of EC. The FDA has actually been approached with this proposal before. In fact, emergency contraception was deemed safe for over-the-counter status by their expert advisory panels with a vote of 23-4 in December 2003. Yet the ruling of early May last year showed their expert opinion apparently wasn’t good enough, and the proposal was denied.
Dr. Tina Raine, the lead researcher of the study and assistant clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California at San Francisco, says that the study clearly shows that "giving increased access is not affecting behavior...I think the FDA’s decision not to make emergency contraception an over-the-counter medication wasn’t driven by available data. There is definitely a conservative ideology that education will promote sexual activity."
Uh, yeah! Well, I guess we’ll see what pans out for the coming decision. Yet even if a decision is made in our favor, we’ll still have to fight for our younger ladies who won’t have that right. Will the obstacles ever cease?
