Controling Your Tubes At Any Age

An article in American Sexuality Magazine titled Are You Kidding? brings about some interesting discussion on tubal ligations ("getting your tubes tied") and age.

The article shares the story of a young woman, now age 25, and her trials in trying to obtain a tubal ligation over the last few years. After being denied the procedure from doctors and even a Planned Parenthood health center because she was too young, the young woman expresses outrage at not being able to choose what reproductive path is right for her.

The main argument against the procedure was simply "you are too young, you might change your mind, come back when you are 30". I can't help but ask myself - why 30? According to one doctor in the article:

“Why do we arbitrarily choose thirty? Because of the thirty years of practice in
my life. Because of the number of years of experience that we, as physicians,
have come to see that twenty-five, twenty-six, twenty-seven year old women have,
historically, more often than not, told you they regretted their decision to get
their tubes tied."

I'm not so sure I agree with this and according to the article, I'm not alone.

“It’s an issue of agency, and who gets to make that choice,” adds Christine
Brooks, a post doctoral fellow studying the purposefully barren at the Institute
of Trans Personal Psychology in the Bay Area.

According to Brooks, “The argument that these women might change their
minds is a paternalistic argument. It questions a woman’s inner knowing, her own
path in life. It also suggests that women don’t know what’s best for them and
that they have to defer to a medical authority to make life decisions.”

At Planned Parenthood of Central Oklahoma (PPCO) - this woman would have received different care and possibly a different outcome to her story. Tubal Ligation services at PPCO are available to women 21 years and older and more information about them can be found here.

It is part of PPCO's mission to support and affirm a woman's right to her own reproductive self-determination. The young woman in the article was ready to make a choice about her reproductive future and was denied the right to do so. What are your thoughts? This is what she thought (and it's a great quote):

“I think there’s definitely this idea where a woman’s function is to have
babies cause your body is made to do it,” she says. “My body is made to do a lot
of things. It’s made to run. That doesn't mean I go running every day. Nor
should I have to.”

Planned Parenthood's International Roundup

From the Planned Parenthood Federation of America's website here are some highlights of their July International Roundup. Highlights are in bold - which you can click on for more information.

Mock tribunal highlights unsafe abortion in Kenya

Iraq war contributing to higher abortion rate
Because of the war, many women in Iraq have been displaced from their homes, lack proper health care, and struggle to provide for their children. As a result, according to a report from the Iraqi Red Crescent Society, they are increasingly seeking illegal abortions, which are often unsafe.

Egypt bans female genital cutting

Indian city offers condoms in pornographic film theaters

The Vatican calls for ending support of Amnesty International
The Vatican has called for withholding donations to Amnesty International because of its mention of abortion in its new sexual and reproductive rights policy. Previously, the policy did not include a position on abortion. The Catholic Church rejects Amnesty International’s statement that its policy is intended to mitigate the effect of human rights violations such as rape and incest, rather than to promote a specific moral or religious doctrine.

If you are interested in reading the letter that Amnesty International wrote to the President of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, you can do so here. It's a good read that instills a bit of hope into you. Here is an excerpt:

"AI's global Campaign to Stop Violence Against Women provides the context
for this particular aspect of our broader policy on sexual and reproductive
rights. Through this work we seek to end the widespread and terrible injustices
of violence against women, which can lead to unwanted pregnancies.

We would be grateful for the church's support in this vital work to end
violence against women but we understand that on some aspects of our work we
may, as good friends often do, agree to disagree. Nevertheless, because we share
many more human rights concerns of far reaching significance, Amnesty
International remains hopeful that our longstanding partnership, despite our
differences on some issues, can continue in the spirit of tolerance and
respect."

Indonesian president calls for revitalization of family planning programs

British doctors vote to ease access to abortion

italics indicate my emphasis

Don't carry a sign, just wear a shirt!

In Dayton, OH election officials are rethinking a policy that would allow poll workers (who volunteer) to wear company/business/agency logo's on their shirts.

Apparently, the Montgomery County Board of Elections is a bit hard up for poll workers. They thought - "Hmm...if we give people a chance for free advertising, maybe they will be more likely to come on in and volunteer".

Brilliant? I don't think so. According the AP - the Board is now being forced to rethink this issue.

"The review came after an anti-abortion group said it planned to recruit people
to work the polls and wear T-shirts bearing the name Dayton Right to Life.
The plan has outraged voter rights advocates. They say political signs,
literature and language are prohibited within 100 feet of polling places on
Election Day. They also say elections workers aren't allowed to discuss
candidates or issues with voters."

Ohio Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, has yet to weigh in on this issue. What do you think?

Fertilized Egg = Human?

I certainly don't think so and I imagine that the majority of people don't think so. However, the anti-choicers are out in full swing in Colorado, pushing their ideologies onto the masses with a ballot proposal that would define a fertilized egg as a human.

From the Associated Press in Denver, CO today, July 20th:

Abortion-rights groups have until next week to appeal the language of a
proposed ballot measure that would define a fertilized egg, either inside or
outside the womb, as a person.

The secretary of state's three-person title board on Wednesday crafted
language for a constitutional amendment that would ban abortions. It would
define humans as existing from the moment of fertilization and extend the
Colorado Constitution's inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process
of law to them.

Arguments by reproduction rights attorney Kara Veitch that the measure's
language be rejected on the grounds it wasn't a single-subject measure because
it applies to three different sections of the constitution were dismissed.

Despite it affecting Article II, sections 3, 6 and 25, the board, which
includes Deputy Secretary of State William Hobbs, cited a common thread of basic
human rights.

Kristine Burton, 19, is working with Colorado for Equal Rights to get the
measure on the ballot.

"Every life needs to be protected," said Burton, of El Paso County. "A
fetus is a separate person from the mother."

The group would need more than 76,000 signatures to get the measure on the
ballot.

In a statement, Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains said it opposes
defining "an egg as a person." "The proponents of this initiative have
been clear. Their intent is to destroy the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision which
legalized abortion," Planned Parenthood president Vicki Cowart said.

Planned Parenthood spokeswoman Lizzy Annison said it will work with the
legal and medical community to identify all the consequences of the proposed
amendment, which Annison said could extend far beyond access to abortion.

As the Planned Parenthood notes in the article, this measure is intended to destroy Roe vs. Wade. These groups have been chipping away for so long and this is a good example at another attempt. However this particular chipping is so blatant and goes too far (just like in South
Dakota last year) I don't think it has a chance in passing.

What do you think?

Polling

Even though were are in the midst of primary rifraf - the polling I'm talking about has nothing to do with that! Instead, I plan to post a poll on the OK Voice of Reason Blog page each week. We would like you to participate simply by voting for the answer that best answers the question for you. There are no right or wrong answers. There are just some questions out there rolling around in my head and it's nice to get an idea of what others think and do.

So help me out! Even if you only take a peek at this blog once in a while - make a note to visit at least once a week to check out the latest poll.

Thanks!

Why I love Barbara Ehrenreich

Well, I love Barbara Ehrenreich for many reasons (if you haven't read her books, please do!), but this latest article she has written in poignant and tells-it-like-it-is.

In her article, Health Care vs. the Profit Principle, Ehrenreich writes:

"Our health care system isn't designed to make people healthier: It is designed
for extracting money from the vulnerable and putting it into the pockets of the
rich".

Read the full article here at Alternet.

"Drive-through" Masectomies

We all have that one person in our address book who sends "the forwards". You know, those emails that fill up your inbox with pictures of cute puppies and inpirational messages as well as the impending doom that will come to you if you dont resend it to a million people in 10 seconds. Well, I let those messages keep coming because every once in a while I recieve a forward that I read and feel compelled to forward on to people I care about. And right now, I feel impelled to make a post out of it, because it has me outraged!

Yesterday I was alerted to the issue of "drive-through" Masectomies. I think just about eveyone knows someone who's life has been affected my breast cancer - so please read the text from that email.

A mastectomy is when a woman's breast is removed in order to remove cancerous
breast cells/tissue. If you know anyone who has had a mastectomy, you may
know that there is a l ot of discomfort and pain afterwards.

Insurance companies are trying to make mastectomies an outpatient procedure. Let's give women the chance to recover properly in the hospital for 2 days
after surgery. It takes 5 seconds to do this and is very important...

If there was ever a time when our voices and choices should be heard, this is one of those times. There is a bill called the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act which will require insurance companies to cover a minimum 48-hour hospital stay for patients undergoing a mastectomy. It's about eliminating the"drive-through mastectomy" where women are forced to go home just a few hours after surgery, against the wishes of their doctor, still groggy from anesthesia and sometimes with drainage tubes still attached. Lifetime Television has put this bill on their web page with a petition drive to show your support. Last year over half the House signed on. You can sign the petition by clicking here. You need not give more than your name and zip code.

Really, it only takes a few seconds. Do it for your mother, your sister, your daughter, yourself!

Women appear to have better access!

A new report shows that sales of the emergency contraception Plan B have doubled since the FDA approved the drug for over the counter use last year.

I hope this finally means that women who need this product are finally able to have easier access to it. I know that there are still hurdles.

We need to make sure that pharmacies will stock the drug and give it to customers without judgement or delay.

We need to make sure that women are aware that it is available to them over the counter.

We need to make sure that rape victims are offered EC in hospital emergency rooms.

We still need to work on the misconception about what emergency contraception is (no, it isn't an abortion pill).

Oh, and yea...we still need to get over the counter access to minors...

Sicko

I had the opportunity to go see Michael Moore's new movie "Sicko" yesterday. I am so glad that I did. I sat through the two hour movie glued to the screen. I cried a little bit, laughed a lot, and shook my head in disbelief often. Because my own tendency towards our health care industry is to be cynical, I wasn't surprised by all that much the movie had to reveal. But I was touched by a lot of the people who appeared in the documentary.

While I don't want to give away anything to those of you who plan to see the movie - I just have to say that I walked out of the theater and got into my car feeling quite sad about my fellow Americans. Everyone deserves the right to basic health care, a notion that most western and industrialized countries embrace - with exception to the United States. The United States simply values profit over people. Folks in Canada, France, and Britain all spoke in the movie about how their health systems take care of everyone - regardless of their ability to pay, regardless of their pre-existing conditions, regardless of anything really.

What do you think it will take for America to take care of the health of it's country?

Do you think it is possible?

Criminalizing Sex

Only in a country where we spend two weeks giving Paris Hilton's jail fiasco media attention, does this story go quietly unnoticed. The headline reads "Sting Operation Uncovers Illegal Sex Toys".

I wonder what the sex toys were and why they were illegal. Since the article doesn't elaborate, I honestly cannot imagine. Our culture spends so much time making sex tabboo, immoral and even criminal that no one stops to think about sex as something that can be pleasurable and life enriching.

My heart goes out to the store owners that were arrested for selling sex toys. I bet these folks are not criminals or bad people. They are the victims of a culture that cannot accept healthy sex acts as normal. A culture that will stereotype sex as wrong, bad, and harmful and totally deny the possibility of it simply being "okay".