1in3Campaign.org: Ana Laura from Advocates for Youth on Vimeo.

The events of this week have been deeply unsettling for our supporters, partners and friends and all of us at Susan G. Komen. We have been distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.

Our original desire was to fulfill our fiduciary duty to our donors by not funding grant applications made by organizations under investigation. We will amend the criteria to make clear that disqualifying investigations must be criminal and conclusive in nature and not political. That is what is right and fair.

Our only goal for our granting process is to support women and families in the fight against breast cancer. Amending our criteria will ensure that politics has no place in our grant process. We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.

It is our hope and we believe it is time for everyone involved to pause, slow down and reflect on how grants can most effectively and directly be administered without controversies that hurt the cause of women. We urge everyone who has participated in this conversation across the country over the last few days to help us move past this issue. We do not want our mission marred or affected by politics — anyone’s politics.

Starting this afternoon, we will have calls with our network and key supporters to refocus our attention on our mission and get back to doing our work. We ask for the public’s understanding and patience as we gather our Komen affiliates from around the country to determine how to move forward in the best interests of the women and people we serve.

We extend our deepest thanks for the outpouring of support we have received from so many in the past few days and we sincerely hope that these changes will be welcomed by those who have expressed their concern.

Dear Laura,

Thank you for contacting me regarding right to life and the issue of abortion.

I fully understand the controversy and diverse opinions surrounding this issue. My own views have been forged over a lifetime of raising a family and following the national debate. In all sincerity, and with due respect to the beliefs of others, I believe that life begins at conception.

Our founding documents establish that we have an unalienable right to life endowed by our creator. Because the abortion debate concerns more than one life, there is not a national consensus as to when life begins or when the life of an unborn child should be protected.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade imposed a judicial dictate that did not end a debate that would be better resolved through the legislative process. As a result, the controversy over abortion has raged for over 3 decades, and there will continue to be attempts to come to a better resolution of the issue legislatively.

I have cosponsored two current bills in the Senate that help define and resolve the issue. I support S. 91 that defines life as beginning at conception, and S. 906 that prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for procedures that so many Americans strongly believe are morally wrong.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your thoughts. It is important for me to hear the views and concerns of the people I serve. Since taking office, I have received over 300,000 pieces of correspondence and have had over 150,000 people participate in live forums and telephone town hall meetings. Please feel free to contact me in the future if I can further assist you or your family. It is an honor representing you and the good people of Wisconsin in the U.S. Senate.

Sincerely,

Ron Johnson
United States Senator

________________________________

I received the above email this morning. I immediately posted it on Facebook and the comments keep coming.

I’m not sure which email Sen. Johnson is replying to here, but I am so appalled by his use of religious language in official correspondence that I have to share it.

I’m referring specifically to Sen. Johnson’s candid mention of “our creator.” As if everyone believes whatever Sen. Johnson believes. As if imposing his religious beliefs on his constituents is part of his job as a U.S. senator.

Regardless of “our founding documents,” I am a strong proponent of separation of church and state. Everyone is entitled to their own religious beliefs or having no religious beliefs, but religion should have no place in government- in theory and practice.

Unfortunately, that’s not the reality. After all, organizations like NARAL wouldn’t have to exist if it weren’t for the religion-politics crossover.

Although the majority of Americans identify as Christians, 3.9-5.5% identify as non-Christian, and 15% don’t identify with any religion at all.

Furthermore…

• A recent Gallup poll shows that those who believe that abortion should be illegal in all cases are the minority;
• A Guttmacher report shows 78% of women who have abortions have a religious affiliation;
• And the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, for example, is made up of about 40 national religious and religiously affiliated organizations from 15 denominations and faith traditions

Clearly, religion and anti-choice sentiments don’t always go hand in hand.

I expected Sen. Johnson’s response to be anti-choice, but I did not expect such a blatant disregard for religious freedom and separation of church and state. Like many politicians, he is using “the issue of abortion” as a platform to promote his personal religious beliefs rather than to simply state his position.

Sen. Johnson’s response illustrates that he is both out of touch and out of line.

So, Laura and Steve Karlen who run VFL, issued the following description of the young woman with direction to call if she were spotted:

Have you seen the pregnant mom? The young pregnant woman, probably in her 20?s, had a darker complexion with dyed red hair and tattoos on her neck and right shoulder. She also had some facial piercings. The woman looked obviously pregnant. We pray that she will never decide to come back to Planned Parenthood. Please let us know immediately if you have seen a woman with this description.

Lisa Subek of NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin had the opportunity to share this email with Madison Police Chief, Nobel Wray.  Subek said in an email, “According to [Wray], it is legal to send such an email but could be considered harassment if the individual who is the subject of the email told the so-called “sidewalk counselors” she didn’t want further contact from them. She could have filed a complaint regarding the email.”

So, does this mean one must opt out of harassment by radical anti-choice zealots?  That we must be clear with those “sidewalk counselors” that scream at us as we enter a woman’s health clinic that we don’t want them to stalk us?

Subek said Wray did understand the concern of such an email, but continued, “I’m not surprised by this answer, but it certainly makes me think about our legal definition of harassment and how we do not do enough to prevent it or to protect victims.”

Wisconsin code defines harassment in the following way:

Striking, shoving, kicking or otherwise subjecting another person to physical contact; engaging in an act that would constitute abuse under s. 48.02 (1), sexual assault under s. 940.225, or stalking under s. 940.32; or attempting or threatening to do the same. (b) Engaging in a course of conduct or repeatedly committing acts which harass or intimidate another person and which serve no legitimate purpose.

Vigil for Life certainly has the ‘no legitimate purpose’ part nailed.

According to Wisconsin state filings, VFL was incorporated in 2009.  They are currently delinquent filing a state required annual report.  VFL’s website, the Karlens’ began “coordinating” Vigil for Life after the 2009 40 Days for Life campaign.

Vigil for Life protests in front of Madison clinics Monday through Friday.   They are also affiliated with Pro Life Wisconsin and boast such followers as Ralph Lang, the man who was planning an attack on Planned Parenthood to, “lay out abortionists because they are killing babies.”  Lang attended several of VFL’s “vigils.”

Pro Life Wisconsin is currently pushing a personhood amendment in the state.   Green Bay State Representative, Andre Jacque introduced Joint Resolution 77 on November 16.

This is on the heels of Mississippi’s failed personhood amendment and is among scores of new personhood legislation being introduced throughout the country.  In order for any amendment to be added to the ballot, it must pass two consecutive sessions of congress.  So, even if the personhood amendment passed the legislature in 2012, it must then pass in 2013 to make the ballot for the following statewide Wisconsin election in 2014.

Emails to Vigil for Life and a call to Mrs. Karlen weren’t returned.

I also directly contacted the Madison PD – the district which from what I could tell is near the Planned Parenthood and Vigil For Life CPC.  Here is the email response I got:

Andy – I am unfamiliar with the email to which you are referring. Please send it to me at this address, and we will take a look.

Cameron S. McLay, Captain of Police

North Police District Commander

City of Madison Police Department

(608)245-3652

After reading this plea you may grow worried – what could have happened to this woman?  Certainly this must be a call for help from the pregnant woman’s family, desperate to locate her.  You can’t be blamed for thinking that – but you would be dead wrong.

This is an All Points Bulletin – an APB! – issued by radical Wisconsin anti-choice group Vigil for Life to track down a pregnant woman seeking services at Planned Parenthood.  Yes, you read that correctly.

The young woman came to Madison but by the time she arrived Planned Parenthood was closed.  Unfortunately, Vigil for Life is setting up a crisis pregnancy center right across the street from the Planned Parenthood Clinic and was there to feed this young woman anti-choice propaganda.  However, the young woman slipped away before the Vigil For Life volunteers got her name.

If you are unfamiliar with Vigil for Life, these are the hardcore protesters outside Planned Parenthood clinics with their “sidewalk counselors” accosting women as they enter.  Remember Ralph Lang, the man arrested in Madison who was planning an attack on Planned Parenthood to, “lay out abortionists because they are killing babies?”  Mr. Lang is associated with Vigil for Life and has attended several of its “vigils.”

Vigil for Life happily trumpets its new crisis pregnancy center on their blog:

Right across the street from Planned Parenthood in Madison, good things are happening! The City of Madison has approved building permits to bring the Women’s Care Center, a successful crisis pregnancy center model, to Madison!

Pulled right from the anti-choice play book – set up shop next to an actual medical clinic to make yourself appear like an actual medical clinic and you get to harass women going into Planned Parenthood to boot.

As I mentioned above, the APB came after three volunteers – or as they say “prayer warriors” – failed to get her name.  The Vigil for Life email blast details the encounter:

The women then crossed to the other side of the street to the future Women’s Care Center to read the sign by the gate.

One of the prayer warriors asked, “Do you ladies need help with anything?” One of them, a young woman said, “Yes, I’m looking for information about an abortion. The prayer warriors started to talk to the woman and her sister about abortion. By looking at her, it was obvious that the young woman was very pregnant and quite sad. The prayer warriors referred her to resources to help. When they mentioned the physical and psychological negative effects of abortion, the sister of this young woman responded, “Yeah, but isn’t the psychological trauma of having a baby and giving it away worse?”

One of the prayer warriors was able to speak to the women on the benefits of adoption versus the consequences of abortion. She shared that, even if you give your baby up for adoption, you can know that you gave some person out there the gift of life. At that point, the pregnant woman started to cry and walk away. As the pregnant woman walked back to the car she turned around and shouted, “I know. I have two children of my own already!”  The interaction seemed rushed, and the prayer warriors weren’t able to get the names of the women before they left.

And then, of course the APB:

Have you seen the pregnant mom? The young pregnant woman, probably in her 20?s, had a darker complexion with dyed red hair and tattoos on her neck and right shoulder. She also had some facial piercings. The woman looked obviously pregnant. We pray that she will never decide to come back to Planned Parenthood. Please let us know immediately if you have seen a woman with this description.

So now anti-choice radicals will be tracking down women by circulating physical descriptions of them?  How many more tools will they be able to use to terrorize women?  At what point does the protection of Vigil for Life’s rights begin to destroy the rights of others?  And when is someone going to step up and legislate against this kind of behavior on the part of anti-abortion zealots?  This move by Vigil for Life is beyond the pale and must not be allowed to pass without notice.

I spoke with Lisa Subeck, Executive Director of NARAL Pro Choice Wisconsin, about this. (We were speaking about another subject but this topic came up. she is the one who shared the email blast with me.) She is considering contacting the Madison police department about the email, rightfully concerned about the legality of it.  I say good on Lisa – this kind of behavior cannot be tolerated.  Will keep you posted.

Dear Mr. Cain,

1in3Campaign.org: Deb from Advocates for Youth on Vimeo.

These billboards continually sadden me because it is an example of a group that refuses to extend the common trust while demanding it from everyone else.  Without fact or understanding, The Radiance Foundation undermines the independence and liberty of all women who decide to have an abortion, minority women especially, for their decision.  Furthermore, instead of investing in options and programs that could ease the burden of those who would prefer to carry a pregnancy to term, they invest in condemnation.  The Radiance Foundation’s campaign is meant to imply or reinforce the notion that these women are abusing the liberty and independence of others.  This is done to justify the persecution of women who chose abortion, when in fact these women are having their liberty and independence abused.

In late March, the racist anti-abortion group “Life Always” unveiled a new campaign in Chicago, using the face of our president to demonize and defame black motherhood.

“Every 21 minutes,” the billboard read, “our next possible leader is aborted.” Next to that text runs the very recognizable profile of our commander-in-chief. Get their message? It’s not subtle: black women, they have no shame in saying, are destroying black communities. By choosing abortion, they’re decimating our future (never mind that Obama’s mother was white). Black women cannot be trusted, these ads clearly imply — not with their children and families, and certainly not with decisions about their own bodies. Do not trust black women, Life Always implores you. Do not trust them.

It’s a message anti-abortion advocates are getting very good at spreading — and I for one have had enough of it. As a black mother, I take these ads personally — and you know what, Life Always? I am offended. I am enraged. I am disgusted that it seems to you, and to all these folks who are willing to sell you ad space, just fine to call black women dangerous, incompetent and downright dumb, out in the open air.

To expose these children that you claim to care so much about to messages that come a hair’s breath away from criminalizing their mothers. To assume we don’t have the good common sense to make reasonable decisions about the limits of our bodies, and our families. To treat us so definitively like what we want and need and believe to be best just doesn’t matter.

Do I imagine that the folks behind this ad much care about how angry and depressed these ads make me feel? Do I think they mind that seeing a billboard declaring “the most dangerous place for an African American is in the womb” – in my own hometown– made me want to tear my hair out with shame and grief? Not really.

Because despite their use of the first person possessive to describe their relationship to the black community, what’s agonizingly clear is that groups like Life Always don’t really give a fig about black people – not about how they make us feel with their racist rhetoric, nor about what happens to black babies after they are born.

If they did care, they would support policies and programs that prevent pregnancies before they happen (and by that I mean policies and programs that are actually proven to work, as opposed to abstinence-only education). They’d stop cutting the guts out of programs that provide subsidized child-care and early education to low-income families, and stop trying to roll back provisions of health-care reform that provide a greater pool of families and children with the medical resources they need.

They’d be leading investigations into why black women die so much more often in childbirth than women of other ethnicities do, and why black babies are also more likely to suffer the same fate, within the first year of their lives.

But they do none of that. Instead, their goal is to undermine the credibility of humanity of people of color, with an eye to the election season that will quickly be upon us. Don’t be fooled: as much as it is about anything else, this campaign is about convincing white Americans (who drive past these billboards, too) of the purported continued “pathology” of the black community – and now, in Chicago, they’re tying the president directly to that insidious message, as a means of delegitimizing him, too.

That should be enough to make anyone who believes in equality and justice furious – regardless of how you feel about the very complex issue of abortion.

As for me, I’m tired of being insulted. I’m tired of waking up every morning to a new affront to my existence and intelligence. But I know that this only ends when we make it end. The moral arc of the universe may be long, and it may bend towards justice, but it does not bend without our help. So sign a petition to put an end to these menacing campaigns. Stand with an organization working to stop the insanity. Do something now — before they come to take more than just our wombs.

In 1970, President Richard Nixon placed such a high priority on family planning that he approved the Title X program to make contraception available to low-income women. Another prominent Republican supporter of the policy, the future President George H.W. Bush, said at the time, “We need to take sensationalism out of this topic so that it can no longer be used by militants who have no real knowledge of the voluntary nature of the program but, rather are using it as a political steppingstone.”

Between then and now, however, a lot changed—and nothing changed. Title X funding steadily grew over the years to go some way towards meeting the comprehensive reproductive health needs of low-income women. But, as made evident by Republican efforts—with the full support of representatives from the United States Conference of Catholics Bishops—to cut off Title X funding in the 2011 budget, it appears that conservative legislators don’t seem to understand that in 2008, Title X services helped 4.7 million women access family planning services.

Millions more received HIV testing, cervical cancer screening and other health services that were, in many cases, the only healthcare they received. Did they truly believe that low-income couples should be left without any means to plan their families, or that essential services would be picked up by shrinking state Medicaid budgets? I think it is more likely that clever political maneuvering has succeeded in hanging contraception with a scarlet letter so that policymakers now fear that being associated with it will alienate part of their constituency.

The reality is that choosing how many children to have, and when to have them, is an intimate decision made by women who, as moral agents, know what is best for themselves and their families. Many have now grown up in an America where reproductive freedom and religious freedom are intimately connected and fundamentally protected. For Catholics, the injunction to respect others’ beliefs is reinforced by the Vatican Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom, which tells us that “in spreading religious faith and in introducing religious practices everyone ought at all times to refrain from any manner of action which might seem to carry a hint of coercion.”

The Catholic tradition also promotes the primacy of conscience, and thus that every person has the right to make choices according to that conscience. The majority of Catholics also want their lawmakers serving individual constituents, not the bishops, so with 98 percent of Catholic women having used a type of birth control forbidden by the Vatican, who is being served by the three bills limiting reproductive freedom currently before Congress? (For that reason, I was delighted to see so many Catholic state legislators sign onto an open letter to Congress that opposed cuts in funding for family planning.)

By ratcheting up the ideological heat associated with family planning, conservatives have succeeded in making it politically dangerous to support funding for family planning services that, according to the Guttmacher Institute, prevented 973,000 unintended pregnancies that would have resulted in 433,000 unplanned births and 406,000 abortions in 2008. Meanwhile, what will happen to the low-income women currently served by Title X? We need look no further than the many nations in Latin America where women’s reproductive rights vary by class.

In almost all Latin American countries, contraception is not widely available and abortion is highly restricted or illegal—officially. In reality, almost any service is available for women with the money to pay for it, which creates a society where only some women are able to act as moral agents. When women are denied reproductive rights based on income, we see poor women with high rates of unplanned pregnancy, mortality from unsafe abortions, and empty promises from conservative lawmakers that don’t translate into a real commitment to poor families. Women of means can afford to purchase safe services outside the law, but poor women don’t have the same escape valve to help them as they seek to live their lives according to their consciences.

Differential access to reproductive health services doesn’t work, and is the opposite of Catholicism’s “preferential option for the poor.” By serving the uninsured, the homeless and the vulnerable, Title X clinics are already on the public health front lines. Stripping them from the landscape will turn many communities into a reproductive health frontier where abortions, legal or illegal, become the only means a woman has for controlling her reproductive destiny, resulting in more abortions every year—not a campaign promise that conservatives were open about.

What other policy items will become “scarlet”—too ideologically loaded to talk about in practical terms? Restrictive legislation has been pushed into center stage in Congress in part thanks to the rhetoric used by people like Tom Grenchik, the executive director of the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. Grenchik recently issued a special briefing to excoriate the services Planned Parenthood offers low-income women and attack Sen. Harry Reid for saying the Senate wouldn’t go along with the attempt to totally de-fund Planned Parenthood. Such talk has little to offer the thousands of women who rely on federally-funded reproductive health services. (Not all conservatives were on the same page—the notorious funder of a plethora of right-wing causes, Richard M. Scaife, placed an op-ed in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review—which he owns—bemoaning the short-sightedness of this latter move.)

There will always be some cooler heads in Congress who are not afraid to handle a hot topic—oftentimes they are Catholic. In a letter to leaders of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), a Catholic, said, “I believe Planned Parenthood provides vital services to those in need and disagree with their funding cuts in the bill.” Getting a birth control prescription filled, going for a yearly OB-GYN exam—these are the quiet acts that make up everyday life lived according to conscience. Title X is one of the successful federal programs in tune with the small, crucial decisions important to low-income families’ lives. Block access to these actions based on income, and you will see something sensational; exactly what Nixon, the Republican family planning advocate, deplored: dramatic health disparities that no lawmaker of any ideology should find acceptable.

Vital Signs: Anti-abortion groups step up attack on Planned Parenthood with Madison billboard

BY SHAWN DOHERTY | The Capital Times| Posted: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 1:00 pm

Pro-Life Wisconsin has teamed up with a national anti-abortion campaign to put up a billboard near a Madison Planned Parenthood clinic today. “CHOICE KILLS THOSE WITHOUT ONE,” the sign says in giant letters. A photo of an African American baby is in the center of the letter “O,” a slash across it.

The billboard has been placed near the Planned Parenthood clinic on South Park Street.

It is the latest salvo in what has been a stepped-up campaign not just against abortions but against sex education and family planning and birth control programs across the state. It is also an example of the anti-abortion movement’s efforts to revive old and widely debunked charges that Planned Parenthood has links to the eugenics movement.

“Abortion is not a true choice for the unborn, for women or for men. Abortion providers prey on those who feel they have no choice, and this campaign highlights this daily reality,” says communications director Virginia Zignego in a press release.

Pro-Life Wisconsin opposes sex education and the use of all forms of contraception. The group has been invigorated by the Republican charge in Wisconsin to defund and shut down various family planning programs across the state. The Governor’s budget includes significant funding cuts and the elimination of some of these programs.

So if the group opposes sex ed and birth control, what alternatives are there for poor women who want to avoid or end unintended pregnancies? I asked Zignego. Adoption and crisis pregnancy centers supported by anti-abortion groups, she said.

The Madison billboard takes aim at Planned Parenthood for what the group’s press release describes as a “history of racism and the continuing eugenics movement in Wisconsin.”

The billboard is just a small example of what has been a ferocious attack, even including undercover sting operations, by anti-abortion activists against Planned Parenthood clinics across the country.

The Madison billboard refers viewers to a website called TooManyAborted.com, run by a group called The Radiance Foundation and headed by Ryan Bomberger, who the press release points out is biracial.

“Our goal is to expose an industry that doesn’t trust women enough to tell them the truth, injects gender animosity by demonizing men, and targets minorities resulting in hugely disproportionate rates of abortion in the urban community,” Bomberger says in the release.

Supporters of Planned Parenthood point out that the clinics are often the only affordable providers of not just family planning services, but of much needed health care in many minority neighborhoods.

Every year, says Amanda Harrington of Planned Parenthood, more than 11,000 Wisconsin women receive screenings for cervical and breast cancers, annual check ups, STD testing, and family planning services that many of them can not get anywhere else. “The simple fact is that many communities in Wisconsin suffer from a lack of access to basic health care. An inability  to access preventative health care leads to many health disparities,” she says.

Last December, the Radiance Foundation worked with Pro Life
Wisconsin to put up 13 billboards in mostly minority neighborhoods
in Milwaukee. "Black children are in danger: too many aborted,"
some said. Others read "Black and Beautiful: Too many aborted."

At that time, Amanda Harrington, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, called the charges against her organization “lies and distortions” and the billboards “reprehensible.”

“They are using racism to interfere with a woman’s ability to access health care,” she told me, as quoted in my Vital Signs post.

Harrington called Planned Parenthood “the state’s largest and most trusted health care provider,” with “doors open to all.”

Racial disparities in abortion rates are not the result of a conspiracy, she said. They occur because minorities experience greater numbers of unwanted pregnancies because they lack access to adequate sex education and affordable health care including birth control.

“If organizations like Pro-Life Wisconsin were truly concerned about reducing unintended pregnancies, they would work with us to increase access to sex education and affordable birth control,” Harrington said. “Instead, they work against us to eliminate health care to women who really need it.”

Just days after the Milwaukee billboards equating abortions with black genocide, Pro-Life Wisconsin erected two signs in La Crosse featuring ultrasound images the organization claim represent the baby Jesus in the Virgin Mary’s womb. Here is an image of that bilboard.

Placed over the fetus in the billboards was a miniature halo. “He’s on His Way. Christmas Starts with Christ,”  described by a Pro-Life press release as a Christian nonprofit in England that sponsored the campaign there.

In my post about the La Crosse billboard, Zignego said the group planned to step up its anti-abortion work in Wisconsin, targeting the state’s controversial sex education law, passed last year.

Dear Mr. Butler:

Recently it came to my attention that The Great Dane provided a charitable donation seen as inappropriate by some in our community.  The donation was to NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin.  This came to my attention on Facebook, from friends who posted this link: http://blog.prolifewisconsin.org/2011/02/02/the-great-danes-defense-of-supporting-naral/ from Pro-Life Wisconsin’s blog, which included your letter.

All I can say is thank you.  Thank you for supporting organizations that make our communities better places to live.  Thank you for using your business to demonstrate your commitment to ensuring that our future has as much promise as our past.  Thank you for living JFK’s charge of “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”  Thank you for your courage and conviction.

I have always enjoyed visiting The Great Dane for the great food, drink and atmosphere.  As a result of your response to this challenge, I am please to tell you that I now consider myself a proud patron of your establishment.  I very much look forward to my next visit to The Great Dane and will definitely bring a friend.

Sincerely,

Frances Irwin

Wausau, WI

P.S.  I’m having a Ladies’ Night In later this month.  I was just going to make desserts and mull some wine.  Now I’m adding appetizers from The Great Dane and a growler to the menu in appreciation of your trust in women!

GRAND FORKS — Like Rod Lammer, I too have noticed the 40 Days for Life campaign’s signs urging North Dakotans to “pray and fast to end abortion” (“Advice for the faithful: Trust but verify,” letter, Page A4, Sept. 30).

I found myself asking how prayer and fasting compares to proven means of reducing abortions.

Unlike comprehensive sex education and access to birth control, neither prayer nor fasting has been shown to prevent abortion. Instead of depriving one’s self of nourishment or mentally soliciting supernatural intervention, individuals opposed to abortion should make contraceptives available and ensure that consumers know how to use them correctly.

But it’s no secret that access to contraception and complete sex education programs face the greatest resistance from Catholics and other religious conservatives.

Presumably, most people who display these “pray and fast” signs would like elective abortion to be illegal. But outlawing abortion doesn’t “end” it. A 2007 comprehensive international study by the World Health Organization and the Guttmacher Institute found that women undergo abortions at a comparable rate in nations where abortion is outlawed. The only effect of outlawing abortion is a greatly increased number of women who are maimed or killed from unsafe attempts.

The data from this and countless other studies shows that the best way to reduce abortions is through greater access to birth control.

Correctly using contraception almost completely eliminates the risk of unplanned pregnancy, but contraception and information won’t stop abortion if it isn’t made available. Randomized controlled studies have shown that abstinence-only programs lead to higher percentages of unplanned pregnancy and sexually-transmitted infections among teens.

Religious conservatives are doing a great disservice to their sons and daughters by keeping them uninformed.

We can all agree that unplanned pregnancies must be reduced to “end” abortion. Let’s invest our precious energy only in the most effective ways of doing so: sex education and birth control, not prayer or fasting.

Meg Brown

Frances Kissling

Princeton University

Visiting scholar at the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania

September 27, 2010

RESPONSE TO: “THE SURGERY I NEEDED TO SAVE MY LIFE”

Posted on www.belowthewaist.org

There is much in the literature by moderate Catholic bioethicists which indicates that using Methotrexate to terminate an ectopic pregnancy is permissible. The intention of the use of the drug is to act on the trophoblastic tissue attached to the fetus. The intention is not the destruction of the fetus which will definitively result but is not the motive. Thus, most Catholic hospital ethicists judge it to be licit.

Here’s a quote from a recent article on the issue from William May. “Methotrexate attacks the DNA in the trophoblastic tissue that attaches the unborn child to its site within the mother’s body; it thus attacks the trophoblast attaching the child to the fallopian tube or cervix or other part of an ectopic pregnancy (I prescind from unborn children implanted in the mother’s abdomen insofar as this is very rare and children so implanted usually can survive until birth).”

“With other moral theologians I thus judge that use of methotrexate can be used to “remove” the unborn child implanted outside the womb; the death of the child is the foreseen but not intended side-effect of an action morally specified as the necessary removal of the unborn child from the mother’s

body as the means, not morally evil in itself, chosen to protect the mother’s life.”

Are there very conservative Catholic hospitals that will not accept this opinion? Yes.

However, since we, as Catholic bioethicists and advocates, agree with most hospitals and physicians that using methotrexate to end an ectopic pregnancy is acceptable under Catholic Ethical Directives, how much emphasis do we give to the much smaller number who disagrees? How is our purpose of better patient care more effectively advanced? Is it not better to stress the positive view which permits its use rather than focus all attention on the minority which is  outside the mainstream of medical and ethical opinion of even Catholic medical and ethical opinion?

“Thank God I was able to have the surgery I needed to save my life,” says a young woman who experienced an ‘out-of-place’ or ectopic pregnancy. She was able to terminate the pregnancy.

You can hear and respond to her story at http://belowthewaist.org/2010/09/ectopic-pregnancy/.

Although she was courageous enough to tell her story in an undisguised voice, I felt that it would be unwise to expose her to harassment. Her thoughtfulness; her personal sense of loss; her gratitude that she was able to receive the care she needed – as well as her anger at close friends who expressed a belief that she should not have terminated the pregnancy – all come through the distortion quite clearly.

Family Planning Health Services (FPHS) begins another “40 Days for Life prayer vigil” in front of a few of our clinics in Central Wisconsin.  Although FPHS is not an abortion provider, the picketers come to conduct their public display of righteousness in part because we support the right of women to a safe and legal abortion.  As health care providers, we must fully face the realities of our patients’ lives and each of us must struggle with informing a decision-making conscience.

Therefore, we think it is a good time to open a discussion about this medically necessary pregnancy termination service.  We are grateful that a thoughtful and articulate woman, who received these services locally in June of this year, helped us by telling her story.

This podcast interview highlights some issues that are of great interest to reproductive rights and reproductive health care advocates and opponents.  The young woman’s interview is followed by an interview with a Wausau OB-Gyn physician who provides a medical description of ectopic pregnancies as well as the risks and available methods of treatment and intervention.

Here are some other thought-provoking quotes from the podcast:

• “I have had friends who said that I should have ‘gone with God’s will,’ imposing their beliefs on my will to live.”
• “We told a few people we thought would be supportive.  I chose poorly.”
• “We need to train our physicians . . . They need to learn to do all of the procedures.”
• “My husband and I really wanted this baby . . . It was DEVASTATING. To put on top of that grief, the insinuation that we did something wrong is completely insulting and heinous.”
• “If they need to say they don’t provide abortions and then perform the life-saving procedures they did on me – then do it.”
• “It’s difficult to know how many (pregnancies are ectopic) . . . but approximately 2% of pregnancies in the first three months.” Earl Zabel, M.D.
• If the ectopic pregnancy is detected early enough, it can be treated with methotrexate administered by injection – and the pregnancy will deteriorate and disappear.  Earl Zabel, M.D.

I wonder how much harm is done to women because they know very little about ectopic pregnancy and they cannot be sure they can get the care they need.

Of all the creepy things I don’t want to see in my campus newspaper, up around the top of the list is advertisements lying to and shaming rape victims who choose to have an abortion.

In a series on RH Reality Check, Robin Marty looked at anti-choice advertising by the Human Life Alliance (a Crisis Pregnancy Center). Marty reports that the “advertising supplement” is riddled with lies, starting with the Table of Contents, where it claims that abortion in America “is legal through all nine months of pregnancy for any reason.” Seriously, if that was true, pro-choicers wouldn’t have any work to do.

From there the insert pursues further common anti-choice deceptions, such as breast cancer scare tactics; inaccurate conflation of birth control with abortion; and gory, frightening, but completely false descriptions of abortion procedures and side effects. But what really takes the cake is the shaming and manipulation of rape and incest survivors, who are told they will feel they’ve “conquered” their assault by giving birth.

The advertising supplement informs students, “In the only major study of pregnant rape victims ever done, Dr. Sandra Mahkorn found that 75 to 85 percent chose against abortion” (underlying message: so if that is your choice, something is clearly wrong with you). What was the “major study”? Why, it was the decisions of 37 women who came to the study’s author for advice. Besides the fact that this is not enough women to be scientifically significant, gee, I wonder if the biases of the rape counselor against abortion had any impact. The medically unsound ad further takes it upon itself to tell doctors to advise against the trauma of abortion for rape victims, without consideration of the unique situation facing each woman.

Oh, and in case of incest, according to the insert, abortion has never ever had a positive impact for the victim. It’s just the abusive parent who wants it; “the incest victim is more likely to see the pregnancy as a way out of the incestuous relationship because the birth of her child will expose the sexual activity.” Really, incest victims should hope they get pregnant as a means of escape? And it won’t be clear to anyone unless she give birth? There are better ways to address incest than saddling a child — since most incest victims are minors — with a child she can’t take care of, and her immature body might not be prepared to give birth to.

The Human Life Alliance has particularly targeted University of Wisconsin schools, with at least seven papers in the system agreeing to disseminate their lies (kudos to the student newspapers who have rejected these ads). Many students are upset at seeing the deceptive ads, however, and are speaking up; in a Letter to the Editor in the Student Voice at UW-River Falls, Nikki Shonoiki denounced the inaccurate “ads”: “Nothing was being advertised here; instead, you [the editor] contributed to the dissemination of 12-page tasteless booklets of disinformation designed to denigrate and shame women who receive abortion care.” And at Stony Brook University, where a campus paper also ran the ads, the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance began a campaign against these problematic inserts and Crisis Pregnancy Centers.

Insist on truth in advertising by signing this petition telling student newspapers running HLA inserts to join their peers who have rejected these inaccurate, agenda-driven ads.

As a result, I understand that health care workers who make abortion services available are everyday heroes.  But Dr. Tiller was different.  He was above and beyond the everyday.  He was a superhero.  And now he’s gone; brutally taken from this life in a way that many who disagreed with his work have implicitly condoned by failing to denounce his murder without qualification.  I haven’t yet fully verbalized my reaction to this event.  This is mostly because I like to accommodate and reassure others and I have no easy answers to the questions my thought will evoke.

My first two thoughts upon hearing of Dr. Tiller’s death were: 1. “Dear God, let this be a mistake.  Please – he can’t be dead,” and 2. “I hope I don’t get shot, too.”  The first part has been a somewhat universal reaction.  The second part requires explanation and reassurances that I don’t know how to provide because it’s out of my control.  This post is my attempt to explain that part and to share how Dr. Tiller’s death impacts my life.

For nearly a year now, the clinic I work at has been targeted by “pro-life” demonstrators.  At various points they’ve carried signs reading, “Family planners promote child promiscuity,” “Stop ALL Abortion,” “Birth Control Leads to Abortion,” etc.  Usually they come once a week on Thursday afternoons, although this spring they participated in the 40 Days for Life Campaign and their website indicates they’ll be doing it again this fall.  One of my responsibilities at work is to document the demonstrators.  This mostly involves takign a few pictures and writing a brief report about what happened that day.

 A little more than four weeks ago, this changed for me.  They had a new sign.  The sign reads, “God Bless Francis Irwin.”  I do not know how they got my name.  I do not know what they intended when they made the sign.  I’d like to pretend that this is no more than a joke in poor taste.  But the actions taken by a “pro-lifer” on Sunday make me question my assumption and my gumption.  Dr. Tiller was a superhero.  He did what few were willing to do.  He never failed to serve his patients regardless of the level of property damage, physical injury, and intimidation he was subjected to as a result of his service.  I am not an everyday hero.  I do not provide abortion services.  I am not a doctor or a nurse.  Our clinic has not been damaged and I have never been physically hurt by our demonstrators.  On a very few occasions, I have been frightened by the demonstrators’ actions.  After Sunday, I realize that I could be intentionally injured by someone who opposes my work.  To some extent allowing myself to worry about that feels like cowardice because Dr. Tiller was a superhero.  And that’s a lot to aspire to.

On Sunday, May 31, Dr. George Tiller, a doctor in Wichita, Kansas, who for decades provided abortions for women even in the face of harassment and violence, was murdered at his place of worship. Sondra Goldschein and Allie Bohm, both of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), attended events in New York City and Washington, D.C., honoring Dr. Tiller’s life.

Sondra Goldschein writes:

When I heard about the murder of Dr. Tiller on Sunday evening, I went from shock to tears to fear to loss. I could feel those emotions but I couldn’t put into words what a tragedy his death is. I finally found the words from Dr. Tiller himself.I attended one of at least forty events across the country honoring Dr. Tiller’s life on Monday night. I was one of a large group of people in downtown Manhattan who heard a story about Dr. Tiller that cut to the core of who this remarkable man was. The story was told by New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

As many of us have now heard, Dr. Tiller was shot in both arms in 1993. What we haven’t heard as much is that he came back to work the very next day. Why? When he needed medical attention, he had received it. His patients needed his care and he was going to be there. “There was never any question in my mind that I was going back to work the next day.”  

Dr. George Tiller truly understood that a woman facing an unintended pregnancy should have the opportunity to make the best decision for herself and her family, whether her decision is raising a child, adoption, or abortion. He respected women and their decisions, and with his wonderful staff, was there to help women from all over the country. According to Dr. Tiller, “abortion is about women’s hopes, dreams, potential, the rest of their lives. Abortion is a matter of survival for women. . . . It is my fundamental philosophy that patients are emotionally, mentally, morally, spiritually and physically competent to struggle with complex health issues and come to decisions that are appropriate for them.“   

Thank you, Dr. Tiller, for your humanity, your bravery, and for treating women with dignity and respect.   

Allie Bohm writes: 

“When you come here, bring only love . . .” read the banner that backdropped the Washington DC vigil in honor of Dr. Tiller. Some 200 people circled the banner, standing in front of the White House. One woman tearfully read prepared remarks, and then the floor was opened up, and women and men of all ages came forward to speak as the spirit moved them. Some of them knew Dr. Tiller personally. Many did not. Some were long-time veterans of the pro-choice movement; for others, Dr. Tiller’s murder had galvanized them to come to a pro-choice event for the first time. 

“When you come here, bring only love . . .” Many of us in DC live in a heady world of policy debates, political statements, and moralizing. Dr. Tiller did not. Speaker after speaker emphasized that while we debate policy, the doctors, nurses, and receptionists in abortion clinics see their jobs as helping women and providing health care services, not as making a political statement. Dr. Tiller is a hero to many of the vigil’s attendees and a martyr to others. But, he did not set out to be a hero or a martyr. He set out to be a doctor. The speakers who knew Dr. Tiller emphasized his compassion and understanding for women.     

One of the vigil’s speakers was a man who has been a clinic escort for 20 years, influenced by a high school classmate of his who died from a botched illegal abortion before Roe v. Wade; at the time she could not afford to go to NY for a safe legal abortion. Those of us who work in the policy sphere sometimes forget that access to safe abortion is a public health issue. He said, “I do not want my son to have to continue escorting when I finally retire.” 

At the same time, a young woman who works with college students reported that in April Dr. Tiller told her, “Now, it’s your generation’s turn.” It is now all of our turns. Doctors should not have to risk their lives so that women do not have to die from pregnancy complications or back-alley abortions. As signs at the DC vigil read, it is time to “keep abortion providers safe now.”

For almost a year now, Pro-Life Wisconsin (PLW) has maintained a protest campaign at our family planning and WIC clinics in Central Wisconsin. PLW activities have included a ‘verbal hijacking’ of our Raising Women’s Voices “Speak Out” on women’s health care so that those who wished to speak on issues unrelated to abortion or contraception were by-and-large unheard in the auditorium. Over the Lenten season, PLW and its local supporters participated in the “40 Days for Life” national campaign — conducting a ‘continuous’ prayer vigil outside our clinic offices.  When asked by local reporters why they were participating in this effort, they said it was to stop abortion.  We do not perform abortions at any of our facilities.  As the 40 Days effort has come to an end, we want to share what we have learned.

The 10 Suggestions:

I.    Publicly express sincere concerns about patient and public safety.
We wrote an editorial which focused on traffic conditions near the clinic and how patients had been affected by the protestors. After the editorial was printed, the protestors stopped harassing patients and obstructing visibility for drivers.
II.    Leave the religious debate to religious organizations.
We spoke with supportive local parishioners of many denominations and asked for their help. The Wisconsin Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice held a news conference that received front page coverage and many church leaders explained that their religious traditions do not oppose family planning or, in many cases, abortion.
III.    Respect the rights as well as the responsibilities of the protesters.
We consistently and publicly expressed our respect for the right to protest, but we also reported any obstruction of clinic entrances or exits (a violation of federal law).
IV.    Maintain Security and Surveillance.
We used digital cameras and recorders to record video covering the entrances and exits at all time.  We also took routine photographs of the protesters. We reported the minor acts of vandalism, entrance and exit obstruction, and harassment to local law enforcement and were able to provide the computerized records as well.

V.    Act don’t React and have a sense of humor.
We hung three large red, white, and blue banners with one word on each one: Condoms Save Lives. When the local newspaper took photos of the protestors, the banners provided a public health message. We also ran general awareness ads on television talking about the services we provide and the value to women’s health. I put up a shadow box with a stone inside, a mallet on the side, and had the glass inscribed “The First Stone – John 8:1-11.” Someone in a hooded sweatshirt stole the mallet, but they left the stone where it was.
VI.    Keep your eyes on the majority.
Quantity matters in the political world, where public policy is decided.  Support for contraception and sex education is growing, even within the parishes recruiting protesters. There is no need to belittle our opposition or demean ourselves.
VII.    Stay focused on facts, evidence, and your mission.
We resisted temptations to be diverted from scientific evidence, provable facts, and the mission of our organization.  Ours is a health services mission of universal access to maternal and child health including reproductive care.  The mission of our opponents is theological and political, so we invited others to speak from those perspectives whenever possible.

VIII.    Follow the law and enforce the law.
One of the opponents complained to city zoning officials that the “Condoms Save Lives” banners intruded over the public right-of-way. We moved them to comply and showed the officials photographs of protestor signs placed in violation of the same ordinance. We asked for equal enforcement.
IX.    Thank contributors and supporters.
You can never express too much appreciation to your supporters, contributors, and your employees.  Use the opportunity to express appreciation and to network.

X.    Let them speak!
The opposition has been unsuccesful persuading even their parishioners(Catholics and Choice) on contraception and sex education. Since their position is fundamentally faith-based and authoritarian, it is unlikely to look rational from other perspectives. At the Women’s Health Speak Out, at our news conferences, in web-postings, in letters-to-the-editor, and even standing in front of our clinics, they communicate quite clearly.  Most people see them as they are and most people disagree with their beliefs and with their tactics.

Vasectonomics

by Christina Page

“Why are we suddenly having an explosion in guys asking for vasectomies?” This is a question Dr. Steven Jones’ staff asks him a lot lately, the Cleveland Urologist told CNN. Dr. Marc Goldstein, a New York-based urologist in practice for over thirty years, told the network, “I have never seen anything like this. When things started to go south in the stock market, then the vasectomy consults went north.” The folks over at vasectomy.com no doubt were pleased for snagging that most awesome domain name. Little did they know a bad economy would provide their payday; the number of appointment requests through their site spiked 30 percent in January.

It’s not just men who are suddenly concerned about their family’s future. Consumers are spending more money on all types of contraceptives, according to the Nielson Company. Indeed, the embrace of family planning appears to be a critical step in financial planning. Nielson said sales of over-the-counter contraceptives jumped a dazzling 10.2 percent in the first two months of the year. The company reports that, while other retail sales slip, condom sales jumped up 5% in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 6% in January, compared with the same time periods last year. Sales of Essure, a non-invasive, irreversible birth control method for women were up also, 28% over last year’s sales.

Planned Parenthood clinics, the leading provider of contraception in the country, also report increased traffic over the past several months, according to Tait Sye, spokesperson for Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “There’s no question we’re seeing increased traffic at most clinics, and many clinics report an increase in new patients as well,” Sye said. A spokesperson for Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa told the local TV news the number of women in the state asking for access to birth control is up nearly 40 percent.

So much for contraception being a non-sequitur in discussions about the economy. Just a couple of months ago, Congressional Republicans, fresh from their first meeting with Obama, stood snickering before the press about the inclusion of a family planning provision in the president’s emergency economic plan. What does birth control have to do with the economy? they chided, suggesting Obama might be trying to sneak a liberal social program by them. Minority Leader Representative John Boehner protested, “Regardless of where anyone stands on taxpayer funding for contraceptives and the abortion industry, there is no doubt that this once little-known provision in the congressional Democrats’ spending plan has NOTHING (emphasis his) to do with fixing the economy and creating more American jobs. ” It was lost on the Republicans, many of whom oppose contraception for ‘moral’ reasons, that rational people facing hazardous economic times need to control the number of children they have to support. And, by the way, that kind of responsible behavior is good for the economy which can hardly afford the social programs to support families who can’t make it on their own. (Republicans are supposedly for responsibility except…when they’re not.)

Boehner might want to check in with that Joe the Plumber demographic who, if recent trends are any indicator, not only considers contraception a great form of protection against uncertain times but is opting for the permanent form at that. (And for any Joe without insurance that vasectomy will cost between $500-$1000, probably twice as much as his tax cut. The contraception provision in the stimulus package would have extended coverage for this kind of contraceptive and others to those earning above 200% of the federal poverty level. So Joe, when you lay out that stack of cash don’t forget to thank Boehner who thinks your decision to prevent an unaffordable pregnancy is too silly to cover.)

The Salt Lake Tribune recently interviewed a local couple in their twenties who see pregnancy prevention as key to their family’s survival. They have two kids, 2 years old and 3 months, and were attending a state insurance fair to sign up for health insurance. He works two part-time jobs and she stays at home caring for the kids. Money is a constant worry– he foregoes medications to pay for diapers and the electric bill. She explained that they are being “way more careful” about preventing pregnancy. The couple is hoping to qualify for government insurance in order to get birth control. “I just worry if the economy is going to get worse. I would starve myself before my kids [go hungry]. What if it gets so bad I don’t have food for them?” Cut to eye-rolling Congressional Republicans.

Family planning is nothing less than a foundation on which many Americans build sturdy, responsible lives. Regardless of political affiliation, that’s exactly what many are struggling to do right now. Those who have lost their jobs and health insurance are in great need of family planning. They’re also, alarmingly, the ones with the least access to it. Meanwhile Republicans openly mock attempts to include family planning as a part of the economic recovery, actively work to defund Planned Parenthood, promote policies that encourage health care workers to deny patients access to contraception, and defend programs that withhold basic information about contraception to sexually active teens. (Then they’re baffled to find the number of teen parents spiked during the Bush years.)

Family planning is an American family value and, as national data indicate, something we rely on in our greatest times of need. Attacks on our right to plan our families shred the social safety net. The Republicans are welcome to titter and heckle the next time a proposal to support family planning crosses their desks. Doing so will only reveal how astoundingly out of touch they are from American’s real lives and needs.

Today we had some of the world’s smallest, happiest, and politest protesters. Everyone should smile for the camera.

CNN – Amid Protests, Obama backs ‘right to choose’ on Roe Anniversary

New York Times – Obama Resverses Rules on U.S. Abortion Aid

New York Times Editorial – Women’s Health, Ungagged

For more information, check out RHRealityCheck.org or Change.org.

A comprehensive resource on trends in abortion in the United States since 1974

State facts about abortion

Information on who has abortions in the United States and why

Listening to the spokesperson for Pro-Life Wisconsin as he defended the new ‘right of conscience’ regulations on Wisconsin Public Radio last week reminded me of the wisdom of the tale.

For 30 years, regulations and federal laws have struck a delicate balance between the rights of patients to receive health care and the rights of health care providers. The new regulations, issued by Health and Human Services Secretary Leavitt, expand the rights of health care providers so extensively that the rights of the patient to receive care are obliterated. The new regulations give the right to refuse to provide health care to all virtually all employees for any health care service they might ‘morally object to.’

Matt Sande, speaking on behalf of Pro-Life Wisconsin, defended the broadest possible right to refuse saying: “These rights aren’t qualified in any way. That’s as it should be. We just have to work around it. We may not understand or agree with an individual’s objection, but we must protect and defend them. . . If we pick and choose which rights we protect, then we won’t have rights for anyone.”

Would this right to refuse apply to physicians who provide abortion services in South Dakota who have been required by state law to inform their patients that terminating a pregnancy is ending a separate, unique human life and that consequences may include depression and suicide? These physicians certainly have moral objections to the content of that message. Health and Human Services Secretary Leavitt has said that, where state laws and the rights of conscience regulations are in conflict, the federal government will help “bring the state into compliance.”

Would volunteers at federally funded abstinence-only “crisis pregnancy centers” have federal civil rights protection for refusing to give out inaccurate and incomplete information [Waxman Report] about the effectiveness of condoms to prevent pregnancy and HIV transmission? As he described patients who ‘may have to go somewhere else,” Mr. Sande said; “One person’s convenience should not trump another person’s right of conscience.”

The moral of the fable is that we are often the source of our own destruction.

The first weakness of the ‘rights of conscience’ regulation expansion is an assumption that only anti-abortion and anti-family planning advocates have moral convictions. The probability that health care employees will refuse to comply with anti-choice or anti-contraception requirements has been overlooked.

The second weakness is a faith-based denial that absolute rights do not exist on this earth. Individual rights require constant, vigilant, rational and empathic balancing. Whether it is the right of a patient to informed consent or the right of the state to protect a fetus, purity is an impossible standard.

The Obama administration must immediately refuse to enforce these regulations and Congress must immediately begin the process to rescind them. In this case, ideologues have given their enemies the means of their own destruction and the regulations must be brought to earth.

Clandestine Procedures Endanger Women’s Health

New research on abortion in Mexico has found a significant increase in the rate of abortions despite legal restrictions that virtually ban the procedure in most parts of the country. Between 1990 and 2006, the abortion rate in Mexico increased by one-third—from 25 to 33 abortions per 1,000 women of reproductive age—according to a study released today by El Colegio de Mexico, the Population Council Mexico Office and the Guttmacher Institute. As a result, Mexico’s abortion rate is now higher than the average rate worldwide (29 per 1,000) and the average regional rate for Latin America and the Caribbean (31 per 1,000). In the same time period, the number of women obtaining abortions annually in Mexico increased by 64%—from 533,000 in 1990 to 875,000 in 2006.

With the exception of Mexico City, where abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy was legalized in 2007, access to safe abortion services is highly restricted. Clandestine, illegal abortions often occur in unsafe settings with untrained providers and frequently result in serious medical consequences.  In 2006, 149,676 women were treated in Mexico’s public hospitals for complications resulting from unsafe abortions.

“It is clear from these findings that making abortion illegal does not decrease its frequency, it just makes it unsafe and puts women’s lives at risk,” said Dr. Fatima Juarez  the study’s lead author. A professor at El Colegio de Mexico and a senior fellow at the Guttmacher Institute, Dr. Juarez added that, “A recent study by the World Health Organization and the Guttmacher Institute on abortion worldwide found that abortion rates are lower in developed regions, where abortion is largely legal, than in developing regions, where abortion is largely illegal.”

While contraceptive use rose between 1992 and 2006—from 63% to 71% among Mexican women—the increased use of contraceptives did not keep pace with Mexican women’s growing desire to have smaller families and to time their pregnancies more carefully.   Lack of information on correct family planning and limited access to contraceptive methods may help explain why Mexican women are increasingly turning to abortion.

“Access to contraceptives is not keeping up with women’s desire to have smaller families. Increased access to a wide range of contraceptive methods and heightened efforts to expand family planning awareness are critical in reducing the need for abortion,” said Dr. Sandra Garcia, Population Council senior associate and country director of the Population Council’s Mexico office.

Abortion is generally safe where it is legal; however, clandestine abortion results in high rates of morbidity and mortality. To reduce the negative consequences of clandestine abortion in Mexico, the study recommends broadening access to legal abortion throughout the country; improving contraceptive services, including postabortion contraceptive counseling; increasing youth-focused initiatives and school-based comprehensive sex education programs; and expanding training in safe abortion provision.

The study “Estimates of Induced Abortion in Mexico: What’s Changed Between 1990 and 2006?” by Fatima Juarez et al. will be presented on October 7 at the “III Research Meeting on Unwanted Pregnancy and Unsafe Abortion: Public Health Challenges in Latin America and the Caribbean” in Mexico City and will be published in the December issue of International Family Planning Perspectives.

Click here for a fact sheet on abortion in Mexico.  For the Spanish version, click here.

The New York Times recently uncovered that the Department of Health and Human Services is drafting regulations that would ‘prohibit discrimination’ against certain health care employees who refuse to deliver contraceptives because of religious or moral objections. Medical organizations, elected officials and activist citizens are protesting the proposed rules because they would declare many forms of contraception to be equivalent to abortion and impose unnecessary and burdensome personnel “conscience protection” rules on federally funded hospitals and clinics in a thinly-disguised effort to interfere with access to birth control. Help us stop the rule change.
Take action:
1) Read the draft regulations.
2) Thank your US Representative and your US Senator(s) if they signed on to the House letter or the Senate letter to the President opposing these regulations. Click here to contact the 104 US Representatives and 28 US Senators that signed the letter.
a. If you need to find your US Representative, click here.
b. If you need to identify your US Senator, click here.
3) If your US Representative or US Senator(s) did not sign on, contact them to encourage their opposition to these regulations.
Learn more:
• Letter from the American Medical Association (AMA) AMA Letter,
• Letter from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) ACOG Letter,
• Information from the National Partnership for Women and Families (NPWF),
• Information from the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA),
• Joint news release from the Wisconsin Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association and the Wisconsin Coalition for Reproductive Choice Joint News Release