Missouri "abortifacient" bill both wrong and wrong

Well, clearly they've fixed everything else in Missouri, as lawmakers there are now able to turn their attention to fatuous bills addressing pretend situations. The recently introduced HB 1625 would -- contrary to the position of the Food and Drug Administration and virtually the entire medical community -- classify emergency contraception (as in Plan B) as an "abortifacient." It would also allow pharmacies to refuse to dispense both Plan B and RU-486 (mifepristone), shielding them from any resulting legal action.

Where do we start?

1. Pharmacies don't dispense RU-486 in the first place. You get it from your doctor. This is disingenuous.

2. Pharmacies don't dispense anything. Pharmacists do. As NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri'sMississippi as the only state to extend "conscience protection" to pharmacies, conferring the broad right to opt out of dispensing emergency contraception without outlining any grounds for doing so. The wholesale opt-out would be unenforceable at best. executive director, attorney Pamela L. Sumners, notes: Pharmacies are corporations, not individuals with "consciences" or "conscience rights." Solid precedent holds that nonsectarian private companies "do not have 'religious' views that are entitled to legal protection." (See United States v. Lee, 1982.) Were the bill to pass, Missouri would join

3. The bill may also violate Missouri's Human Rights Act, which forbids discrimination based on sex, and possibly even Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

It's a bad, bad bill, politically and legally. Too bad to become reality? Maybe, maybe not. And it's hard to see how the reproductive-rights situation can get much worse in Missouri to begin with. Still, we can't dismiss this bill as harmless grandstanding. Why not? Well, it's like when a courtroom lawyer says "[question] withdrawn" or a judge asks for something to be stricken from the record. Either way, the jury still hears it. And in this case, what people hear is:

1. Emergency contraception and RU-486 are the same (sic).

2. Women can get abortions, along with mouthwash and Milk Duds, at their local Walgreens (sic).

All of which plays into -- and reinforces -- the frequently peddled notion that women need reining in, as does our alleged qwik-abortion culture. It all adds up, even drop by drop, and helps cement public perception. So even if those misconceptions don't actually get this bill passed, the damage, in no small part, will still be done.

Article by Lynn Harris - as posted on salon.com

1984?

"The "Party" has taken over all aspects of life... Winston is painfully aware of the telescreen, which is both a receiver and transmitter at the same time. It incessantly relays messages from the Party and simultaneously allows the dreaded "thought police" to tune into the activities of any individual at any given time." www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984

The most recent claims to reproductive fame by Rep. Therese Sander was handling the abominable sex mis-education/abortion restriction bill last year. She was also the sole sponsor of a bill that would have ascribed a 'conscience' to corporations, employers, and insurance companies allowing them to deny health services to patients based upon personal beliefs and ideological values. Among the many terrible bills with Rep. Sander's name are:

• a bill that would protect denying pharmacists;
• a bill that would require parental consent for birth control for teens; and
• a bill establishing an 'alternatives to abortion' program that categorically cannot provide family planning services (the best 'alternative to abortion').

But her piece de resistance - filed this year - is a bill that would require doctors who perform abortions to ask women why they are seeking an abortion, then report that information to the state government!

It is filed as HB1984; could that be intentional, or is it some kind of Orwellian slip?

1984...hmmm, makes a girl think back to high school and learning the definition of dystopia.

Can you spell 'Big Brother'?

Alison Gee is the Vice President of Public Policy at Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region

What We've Done.

Governor Blunt claims he wants to help and protect Missourians. He says that everything he does is ‘for Missourians’. Problem is, there’s a world of difference between what Governor Blunt thinks that we want to hear and what we are demanding to know. In Missouri, political rhetoric constantly trumps women’s healthcare and thousands of Missouri students sit in classrooms where sex ed lessons are medically, factually inaccurate - something Blunt considers a "mission accomplished". Our Governor has failed. In a state that encompasses cities with some of the highest STI rates in the country, Governor Blunt traded his sense of ‘protecting Missourians’ long ago in order to gain political clout with his group of hardline fans. Unfortunately, regular Missourians don’t feel so 'protected.'

Governor Blunt just announced he is not running for re-election. Just as well ... Missouri voters, like you, understand that votes matter and have already told us that you strongly support state funds for family planning (69%*), that you believe pharmacies should dispense birth control without discrimination or delay (65%*), that you believe sex education should be comprehensive (76%*), and that the government should not step between a patient and her doctor (63%*). Not what Governor Blunt wants to hear. But, together, we say "enough is enough to failed policies and failed politicians." [*statewide poll conducted September 2007]

This legislative session, we need your help to keep pushing forward. In Jefferson City, there have already been seven bills introduced that restrict Missourians' access to Planned Parenthood programs and services. Then there's the shadowy Task Force - the sham group Governor Blunt created that could - any day now - release unscientific and unhelpful 'results.'

Let your friends know about the REAL Task Force to Protect Women’s Health and Lives. Let them know that we are the informed majority and that this Session, we are showing our power in the Capitol through activists and supporters across this state.

Gov. Blunt announces on anniversary of Roe that he will not seek re-election

On Tuesday, Governor Blunt announced that he would not be running for re-election. While this was interesting and welcome news on the day pro-choice advocates celebrated the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we do not share in his delight at his ‘mission accomplished’ where healthcare is concerned. Under his watch, and with his support, Governor Blunt has:

• Refused to fund the successful state Family Planning Program that provided services to 30,000 women;

• Eliminated 19-year contracts with Planned Parenthood health centers in Springfield and Joplin for breast and cervical cancer screening services;

• Cut healthcare for more than 100,000 Missourians—many of them women and children;

• Promoted ineffective and harmful abstinence-only education for public school students, denying teens information about contraception;

• Supported protecting pharmacists who deny women birth control;

• Diverted thousands of taxpayer dollars to crisis pregnancy centers that mislead women, lie about birth control, and use scare tactics regarding abortion;

• Continued to increase funding to the Alternatives to Abortion program that explicitly may not fund family planning services—the very best ‘alternative to abortion’ services;

• Established a sham task force to study abortion made up entirely of individuals who are 100% opposed to both abortion and contraception.
  

In three short years, Matt Blunt has undone years of hard won improvements to women’s health and set back the healthcare of hundreds of thousands of Missourians. But this was not done single-handedly. And, while we are pleased he will no longer be in a position to endanger women and teens, the legislative leadership that helped achieve these goals remains in place. We sincerely hope this leadership will now choose to value prevention and wellness and join with us to Put Prevention First.

Alison Gee is the Vice President of Public Policy for Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region

Abortion Ban Task Force meeting update

Greetings from the Missouri State Capitol! Less than one week into the 2008 Missouri Legislative Session and, as the lobbyist for Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri, I can tell you things are heating up. Let’s take today (1/15) for example, from 12-2, I suffered through a meeting of Governor Blunt's sham of a Task Force on the Impact of Abortion on Women where anti-choice ideologues spouted the most puzzling and outrageous things regarding abortion. None of Blunt's Task Force members have a day’s experience providing safe, medically reputable contraceptive, sex education or abortion care - nor have they asked anyone who has that experience to testify before them!

The award for the most hypocritical statement of the day goes to a Task Force member who is a lobbyist promoting abstinence-only sex education which withholds life-saving information from teens. He surprised me with this statement:

"Since when do we, as a culture, value a lack of information."

Good thing he wasn't looking at a mirror when saying that one.

They spent a lot of time reviewing medically inaccurate doozies presented in previous meetings and brainstorming ideas that show they have no idea about current counseling or reporting practices and requirements.

To give you a virtual front-row seat in the Missouri Legislature, I’ll be posting periodically throughout the session. To get a real front-row seat, come join me in Jefferson City and I’ll show you around. Just contact your local Planned Parenthood Organizer.

'Til Later, Michelle Trupiano, MSW,
Planned Parenthood affiliates in Missouri Lobbyist

Abortion panel an embarrassing waste

An open letter to Gov. Matt Blunt: I am writing to express outrage at your violation of the public trust through convening a committee of ideologues who will support your belief that abortion is harmful to women and children, beliefs that are not supported by credible scientific research. I am not alone in this outrage. The American public is tired of public officials putting ideology before science and appointing unqualified people to make scientific decisions. As governor, you have an obligation to all of the people of Missouri, not just your fundamentalist base.

Calling the committee you have convened "scientific" adds insult to injury. The committee consists of members who are not only biased but also unqualified to assess research methodologies. Some research does claim abortion is harmful to women. For example, your committee is likely familiar with the Elliot Institute and its director, "Doctor" Michael Reardon, who claims abortion causes serious health problems despite research to the contrary by the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association. It’s important to consider that Reardon received his "doctorate" through an online diploma mill called Pacific Western University, which was investigated by the Government Accounting Office as one of four "diploma mills and unaccredited schools" that the federal government should not fund. Reardon did not labor through six to eight years of post-graduate education to gain expertise in research methodologies - nor did he pay the expenses. This is not just a question of scholars making differing arguments about the impact of abortion, but one of the quality and credibility of scholars and the research they produce.

The most extensive research done to date on abortion was the Koop report funded by the Reagan administration with the hope of proving the harmful effects of abortion. State officials told the news media the outcome of the research was inconclusive. This was not true. In 1989, the Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations held an investigative hearing to review the findings of the report. The review indicated the report had concluded that "abortion is medically safer than pregnancy and childbirth, both in terms of mortality and morbidity," and that "delays in obtaining an abortion, for whatever reason, jeopardize the physical and mental health of the mother." Koop, who opposed a woman’s right to abortion, also commented on his disappointment with the "poor quality" of research produced by the anti-women’s rights groups.

Koop was a person of integrity who refused to prostitute his professional standards for ideological correctness. Can the same be said of the committee you have convened? To guard against "poor quality" research, it is imperative to convene a committee of members with expertise in different research methodologies and who have differing views on abortion to critically analyze all research claims.

In his testimony, Surgeon General Koop also said "psychological problems from abortion are rare and not significant from a public health viewpoint." When you study the research on "post-abortion syndrome," be sure to include the research of the incoming president of the American Psychiatric Association, Nada Stotland, who concludes it is not a serious health-care problem. Carole Joffe, a sociologist who studies reproductive health care and the abortion issue at the University of California at Davis, has similarly said, "The repeated attempts by opponents of abortion to allege negative mental health effects of abortion - so-called ‘post abortion syndrome’ as well as negative physical effects, such as a link between abortion and breast cancer - have been discredited as ‘junk science.’ The alleged link between abortion and breast cancer was repudiated by a consensus conference called by the National Cancer Institute. If opponents have moral objections to abortion, they should state those. They should not rely on false statements to make their case. "Readers can go to the American Cancer Society’s Web site to find its conclusion that "Research studies, however, have not found a cause-and-effect relationship between abortion and breast cancer." The ACS also discusses the "bias" in earlier studies that led to this conclusion.

It is obvious this committee has been convened to support the denominational doctrine of its members, who not only oppose abortion but sex education and birth control. The international research of the World Health Organization concludes, however, that providing accessible birth control reduces the number of abortions. The reduction in abortion rates with access to birth control is evident in Eastern Europe, especially Russia, where very high abortion rates have been decreasing over the last decade as birth control options have become available. Making abortion inaccessible will not stop it. It didn’t in the United States before its decriminalization. Right now in Brazil, a mostly Catholic nation where abortion is illegal, there are 800,000 illegal abortions annually. About 4,000 women die as a result of those illegal abortions, making it the fourth leading cause of maternal death in Brazil.

Convening this committee is disingenuous and an embarrassment to the state of Missouri. How about using taxpayer money to convene a committee about post-traumatic stress syndrome among Iraq veterans or battered women and children? How about finding out how those women and children whom you have cut off of Medicaid are doing? We need role models in political office who demonstrate respect for science, religious pluralism and the public good. How dare you sacrifice the health of Missouri’s women and children on the altar of political expediency, ignorance and religious intolerance?

Victoria Johnson is a faculty member in the Sociology Department at the University of Missouri and a member of Faculty, Staff and Students Concerned about Democracy and Public Knowledge.