COMMENTS: 92
Private RU-486 Confounds Anti-Abortionists: Who Can We Harass Now?
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email.
Or, at the very least, if this mob of screeching would-be fetus rescuers wants to continue its brand of guerrilla warfare -- a decades-long face-down with abortion providers who have accepted the possibility that they'd be blown up at their desks or taken out by a sniper while sitting at their dinner tables as just another part of the job -- its self-righteous, lunatic members will have to work a lot harder.
It's about time. Because, judging from the religious right's30-year campaign of violence against U.S. and Canadian medical clinics, I'd say murder in the name of God hasn't been too difficult. Here's a look at domestic terrorism by the numbers:
- 7 murders, including 3 doctors, 2 clinic employees, a security guard, and an escort
- 17 attempted murders
- 383 death threats
- 153 incidents of assault and battery
- 3 kidnappings
- 41 bombings
- 173 arsons
- 91 attempted bombings or arsons
- 619 bomb threats
- 655 bioterror attacks (all hoaxes), 554 of which were committed by one man
- 1,630 incidents of trespassing
- 1,264 incidents of vandalism
- 100 attacks with butyric acid stink bombs
One-third of all abortion clinics in 1981 were gone by 2005.
If Islamic Jihadists had done even a tenth this much damage, every last Muslim in America would be doing stress-position calisthenics in a concentration camp somewhere in the Nevada desert right now. But since this impressive achievement in domestic terrorism was almost entirely accomplished by white Christian men -- well, y'see, it's Not Terrorism when we do it -- the public has barely batted an eye.
In fact, while most of the country was looking the other way, that's when the supply lines for abortion shifted. According to a recent article in the Washington Post, that change -- RU-486 -- is starting to make a fundamental difference in the way abortion happens -- and is talked about -- in this country.
According to the Post's Rob Stein:
At a time when the overall number of abortions has been steadily declining, a new survey reported that RU-486-induced abortions have been rising by 22 percent a year and now account for 14 percent of the total -- and more than 1 in 5 of early abortions performed by the ninth week of pregnancy.It's not the actual numbers that are interesting here; it's the trendline. RU-486 has been available in the United States since 2000, and its use has been increasing at a slow but steady rate ever since. What's new is that it's finally approaching critical mass, gaining acceptance with the vast numbers of doctors who've wanted to offer their patients the option of a safe early abortion, but simply couldn't take on the daunting social, financial or physical risks of performing the operation themselves. Increasingly, year by year, RU-486 has allowed more and more of these doctors and their patients to do a complete end-run around the crazies at the clinic door. And this has gone on long enough now that it's starting to change the way we approach the whole issue, on several fronts.
First, it's already putting more abortion providers back in service. For 20 years, the number of doctors and clinics offering abortion was in free fall: Every year, it seemed, more of them succumbed to anti-choice harassment and pressure, and closed their doors. Old doctors retired; young ones were discouraged from learning the procedure; clinic directors balked at the PR and security problems and the insurance premiums. But, according to the Guttmacher Institute, the rate of decline suddenly flattened from 8 percent to 2 percent in 2001, as doctors started adding RU-486 to their practices -- and that rate has held steady ever since. We're still losing abortion providers, but most of those losses are being offset by the growing number of doctors offering drug-induced medical abortion. Even better news: Those doctors are now everywhere, including states where the last surgical abortion provider was run out years ago.
Second, it's changing the way women experience abortion. Medical abortion gives women the dignity of going through the process in the privacy and comfort of their own homes, rather than having to hunt down a clinic, get themselves there, and face down the hysterical, pleading mob massed around the clinic doors both before and after enduring a painful and invasive surgery. Also: Most late abortions are necessary only because women are forced to wait too long while they arrange the funding, access or logistics for an expensive, often too-far-away surgical abortion. Mifepristone greatly reduces the expense and hassle -- and, with it, the unnecessary delays that lead to most later-term abortions.
Third, unlike most drugs, RU-486 is dispensed directly by doctors -- which also cuts out of the loop moralizing pharmacists who see women's most essential life decisions as a sort of moral gym equipment on which to freely exercise their underdeveloped consciences and score some extra Jesus Points in the process. (A lot of these same people can't be trusted to hand out birth control pills or Plan B, either -- and if the pharmacy profession can't get these people to fulfill the terms of their licenses, RU-486 is the precedent from which to argue that we should seriously consider putting these other controversial items back into the hands of doctors as well).
Fourth: As medical abortion becomes the norm, women aren't such easy pickings for the religious right any more. You can't just hang out in front of the clinic on Tuesdays and Thursdays and assume everyone coming up the sidewalk is a slutty, bamboozled, callous-hearted, baby-killing bitch who just doesn't understand that it's a baaayyybbeee, that she has options, and that Jesus loves her.
Increasingly, women seeking an abortion are bypassing the clinic entirely. Instead, they're showing up for regular appointments, on all days of the week, at doctors' offices all over town. Which makes it hard on the berzerkers: After all, there's no legitimate way of knowing which doctors are in the abortion business now, or why any individual woman is seeing any given doctor on any given day. Our culture has strong, long-standing customs protecting discussions between doctors and patients, and as abortion increasingly slips behind that wall, that decision is finally ending up exactly where we've always argued it should be -- as a private matter between a woman and her doctor.
When that happens, the question becomes: Will the anti-choice terrorists respect that wall -- or will they try to go over it, get around it or simply blow it up?
What's likely to happen -- because it's what usually happens when radical groups are driven to the fringes -- is that the moderate members who make up the bulk of the movement let go and move on, leaving a much smaller fanatical core to carry on. Without that moderate influence to provide a constant, tempering reality check, the craziness level heats up and becomes concentrated. The remaining True Believers have wrapped up their lives and careers in the fight. For these professional warriors, losing control of the battlefield -- in this case, losing control of women, and the presumed male prerogative to control women's fertility -- may prove to be a fate too shattering to contemplate.
When this kind of defeat and isolation happens, we're usually wise to expect trouble. They'll probably never give up on Planned Parenthood as the all-time all-star Personification of Absolute Evil in their perfervid little cosmological drama, but when abortion vanishes behind a wall of privacy, we can expect to see newly focused attempts to breach the wall of doctor-patient confidentiality, using every means at hand.
They're already at it, as those who've been following the exploits of former Kansas attorney general Phill Kline can tell you. (Kline used his office to harass the state's abortion doctors, requiring them to give up their case records to state review -- a step that would have outed tens of thousands of women who'd had abortions). This is a preview of what doctors will be in for: Escalating attempts to use the law (or simple spying) to discover their treatment choices, open their files, and put their patients' data on public record. We'll see increased use of medical oversight and disciplinary boards to harass doctors and compile lists of women who've had abortions. To the degree this succeeds, it will set terrible precedents that will jeopardize everybody's right to the confidentiality of their own medical records.
And, with those lists in hand, they could -- for the first time -- start going directly after women. In medical abortion, the agent of termination is not surgical instruments in the hands of the doctor in an office, but drugs in the hands of the patient at home. That fact literally puts the event far more directly under women's control -- a shift that may finally force these fanatics to fully reckon with the fact that women are ultimately the responsible moral agents in every abortion decision. And if they do make this leap, we can expect it to get very nasty indeed as the personal becomes political on a whole new level. Our increased privacy could be met with overwhelming publicity: websites, public flyers, picketing in front of our houses, harassing phone calls to employers and family members. The more private the choice becomes, the harder they might fight back by trying to make it as public as possible.
When the frustration builds to the point where violence comes, it could appear on that same front as well. In the past, anti-abortion terrorists bombed clinics because "that's where the babies die," and shot doctors because they were "the real murderers." In the future, that same logic may lead them to bring the gasoline and bombs to the new "abortion chambers" -- that is, our own private homes -- and direct their rage at the new "murderers," now recognized as women themselves.
From there, it's easy to step off into truly frightening images culled from The Handmaid's Tale. That's one possible outcome to be aware of; but, luckily, it's far from the most likely one. More likely, public revulsion at these outrageous privacy invasions and violent tactics will be their undoing -- putting the anti-choice movement in such bad odor that it will lose all of its credibility and most of its cultural support.
We'll know we're getting close when the conventional wisdom accepts that "pro-life" is exactly the equivalent of "pro-snooping-in-your-family's-business"; that "saving babies" is usually a self-righteous bully's excuse for harassing and assaulting women; and that "anti-abortion violence" is, precisely, the modern definition of "domestic terrorism."
RU-486 is, still slowly, shifting the public conversation about abortion. As that new discussion opens up and grows louder, it will also change the ways in which pro- and anti-choice people interact. And -- if we watch for it -- it may give us our last, best chance to return the entire subject to the private sphere, where it ought to be, once and for all.
Stay up to date with the latest Reproductive Justice headlines via email
» They WOULD be outraged if we found out they have diabetes...
Posted by: Callibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Turiye on Feb 14, 2008 2:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will seek them out like a pitbull if they come near mine.
These young women have no idea what we've endured. What will those horrid Seniors do now? Maybe a real live child that needs love, support and healthcare. 'YA THINK?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And The Answer Is...
Posted by: bobtr900
» RE: It is about time, but damned if we do and....
Posted by: lenioui
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Turiye on Feb 14, 2008 2:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will seek them out like a pitbull if they come near mine.
These young women have no idea what we've endured. What will those horrid Seniors do now? Maybe a real live child that needs love, support and healthcare. 'YA THINK?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: d.nweindeb on Feb 14, 2008 2:53 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: d.nweindeb
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: JSquercia
» AND pro-lifers seem to have more abortions than pro-choicers
Posted by: Beck
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: d.nweindeb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Feb 14, 2008 4:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: if you are against abortion, don't have one
Posted by: Moira61
Comments are closed-
Posted by: colinmeister on Feb 14, 2008 5:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jmmartin on Feb 14, 2008 5:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A: Drug stores that carry it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: TheNamelessCity
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: willymack
» RE: insiders
Posted by: Dboy
» RE: insiders
Posted by: IntlDad
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: the problem
Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: thealltheone
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: lepidopteryx
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AnIndependentThinker on Feb 14, 2008 5:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I personally do not agree with abortion, it is not my right as an individual to make that choice for someone else. Nor is it the right of a radical terrorist to make that decision either. If anti-abortion bombers think that God loves them for killing more people for the life of a fetus, then they are obviously not working in the name of God.
And I agree, had these anti-abortion bombers and murderers been of Muslim origins, I am certain that this nation would be up in arms and ready to go after the "evil-doers."
Great article. Great topic. Sheer truth.
Thanks for sharing this piece.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Kudos to Sara Robinson
Posted by: babs
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on Feb 14, 2008 5:47 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: don't bogart that RU-486
Posted by: Sushi
» RE: don't bogart that RU-486
Posted by: ALANHESTER
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Opinionator on Feb 14, 2008 5:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: constitution, what constitution on Feb 14, 2008 6:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the anti-choicers will realize what they need to do is spend some of that energy educating people so abortion rates drop. Man, that's crazy talk!
The only negative here is that I'm going to eventually lose a group of people to mock when I walk by my local clinic. You should see the expressions on their faces when they're kneeling in front of the clinic praying and crying and you walk by and laugh at them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: People Outraged by Invasion of Privacy?
Posted by: babs
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JSquercia on Feb 14, 2008 6:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not believe that these laws should be upheld . That is the profession they chose and so long as the perscription is legal there should be NO right to refuse to fill it . The impact would of be far greater in smaller communities which would have fewer Pharmacys . In cities and suburbs there are usually multiple Pharamcy's . We will soon have 3 in
four block area where I live in Nassau County NY .
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: New tactic
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: New tactic
Posted by: praedor
» Imagine...
Posted by: zipper696
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Johnboy on Feb 14, 2008 6:58 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: enlightened **BACK TO THE FARM, JOHNBOY**
Posted by: maribelle
» If one of your neighbors bombed your house,
Posted by: hurricane hugo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: praedor on Feb 14, 2008 7:00 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The situation is a little better with NON-RU-486 drugs. Virtually ANY anti-cancer chemotherapeutic drug can be used to terminate a pregnancy. You cannot prevent terrorist agents from going to various doctors and saying they're preggers and want to end it to identify those that will prescribe drugs to terminate pregnancies, but it WOULD render impotent the pharmacists that would act as "moral gatekeepers" and otherwise deny women their birth control or abortion drugs: they cannot deny a woman her chemotherapeutic and there is no way for the pharmacist to know whether a woman with a prescription for methotrexate is pregnant or actually has cancer needing treatment.
RU-486 helps but it is hardly an answer. It would help a great deal if the drug had more widespread AND KNOWN use beyond simply terminating pregnancy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One drug in RU-486 is Cytotex -- the 50-cent anti-ulcer drug now used across Latin Am to abort
Posted by: janvdb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Feb 14, 2008 7:14 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Nazis
Posted by: Capybara
» RE: How can someone be a "good Christian" and abolish the church?
Posted by: bitsfick
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JSquercia on Feb 14, 2008 7:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I realise it somewhat off topic but the very idea of Privacy means NOTHING to These people
EXCEPT of course THEIR privacy which is protected by Executive Privelege and Deleted
E mails .
Scary thought is once Medical Records are no longer Private it will only be a matter of time before Insurance Companies gain access to them and use them to restrict Medical Coverage .
Imagine what they could do with DNA . If your DNA shows a genetic disposition towards some
disease NO insurance for YOU .
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Privacy There is no Stinkin Privacy
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Privacy There is no Stinkin Privacy
Posted by: willymack
» RE: Privacy and single payer government healthcare!
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE:No insurance for you!
Posted by: Sushi
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gottabeme on Feb 14, 2008 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: praedor
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: gottabeme
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: LRayn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: scott balogh on Feb 14, 2008 7:21 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: youngdem
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: A human life begins.... When? **SINCERE ANSWER**
Posted by: maribelle
» Thanks, maribelle. I should have read you first.
Posted by: Beck
» RE: Thanks, maribelle. I should have read you first. ALWAYS A PLEASURE, BECK
Posted by: maribelle
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: LRayn
» None of us needs to make decisions based on YOUR feelings
Posted by: Beck
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: babs
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: RosieRivetor
» "Human life" has no beginning and no ending
Posted by: chief of okeefe
» RE: OK,OK!!
Posted by: scott balogh
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT**
Posted by: maribelle
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT**
Posted by: scott balogh
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT****STAY IN YOUR OWN YARD< SCOTT**
Posted by: maribelle
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pikaomega on Feb 14, 2008 7:30 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I grew up with an extremely abusive father, leading of course to all kinds of "Daddy issues" that have haunted me in my own relationships; I am BiPolar I, which has led to several psychiatric hospitalizations and requires massive amounts of medication every day to simply keep me alive; I was in a auto accident at the age of 20 which mangled me internally, claiming organs and rendering my liver, kidneys and pancreas sub-functional. But, most importantly, I have never wanted children. I have no maternal drive, and not once have I thought to myself "I want a baby." In light of all of this, I decided at a young age (I am now 28) that I wanted a tubal ligation. I am blessed to have a family that stood behind my decision, and though they mourned the loss of what I would never have, they understood that this was the route that I needed to take. My mother is a nurse, my biggest champion and my fiercest critic. We repeatedly assessed the situation, and both came to the conclusion that a.) I would most likely not be able to physically handle a pregnancy, b.) I could not put a child through seeing their mother in a psychotic state, and c.) The responsible choice was to opt to prevent a situation (though amazingly effective, no birth control is 100% and mistakes happen) that would result in an abortion.
I was told that I would have to wait until I turned 25 before any doctor would even discuss the proceedure with me. So, in 2005, I began the daunting task of finding an OBGYN that I could meet with. I am not insured, but had the cash in hand for the operation. I began contacting offices, and I was astounded by what I found.
I was told, ad nauseum, that despite all of the logical, pragmatic reasons for me to undergo this surgery, I was simply confused and that no doctor would talk to me...I didn't know what I wanted. I would change my mind. Come now, don't you want to be a mommy? Sure you do. We can give you birth control. IUD. Depo. The pill. I was hung up on, laughed at, lectured and scorned.
After four and one half months, I finally found a doctor willing to see me. The surgery was a breeze, and three years later, I still regard it to be the best decision that I have ever made.
My point is this: Why is it that I could elect to have an abortion as a teenager, but as an adult with serious mental, emotional and physical afflictions I was deemed unfit to make the decision that the best course of action for me was to take abortion and pregnancy off of the table all together? I am, ABSOLUTELY, in favor of practicality when dealing with birth control and abortion. I was fortunate to have a mother that was totally open and honest when these topics arose, and that gave me the infomation necessary to take responsible measures to prevent negative consequences. I am simply saying that we seem to put the cart before the horse here. Abortion should be available, safe and infrequent. But playing politics with the health of millions of women is what breeds the shame and misinformation that result in unwanted pregnancies.
I would say to all of you that have young daughters, my mother's openness and honesty set in me a deep trust for which I am forever thankful. I was never made to feel ashamed, and was rightfully taught that sexuality is at the foundation of human nature. Because of this, I never hesitated to ask her about birth control and abortion, and had faith that the advice I was given was honest and in my best interest. This discussion is what prevents disasterous situations. We know that moralizing doctors and pharmacists exists, and you can never be sure that the advice you're given is medical or moral. Be your daughter's first line of defense, they will be forever grateful.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Doctors looking after their own interests
Posted by: colinmeister
» RE: Through the looking glass...
Posted by: dudelette
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Feb 14, 2008 8:13 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
# 17 attempted murders
# 383 death threats
# 153 incidents of assault and battery
# 3 kidnappings
# 41 bombings
# 173 arsons
# 91 attempted bombings or arsons
# 619 bomb threats
# 655 bioterror attacks (all hoaxes), 554 of which were committed by one man
I wonder how these stats over the past 30 years would compare with number of violent crimes committed in the name of scoring a fix (a different drug from ru-486, mind you) in the previous year alone.
These stats do confirm that in a nation of 300M, we have some very whacked individuals, to the point that an average citizen on an average day "enjoyed" the chance to encounter an anti-choice oriented whackjob that would kill them on the order of 7/30*365*300000 = 2.13x10-9 (a tad off, as I just used the latest census for the population).
Nevertheless, this tells us the dire grip that anti-abortion advocates grip our country: you're only 100,000 or so times more likely to die in an airplane crash than as a result of abortion on a baptist pulpit. Or somewhat thereabouts...
Oh those deadly christians. As soon as we get done banning planes, pools, and cars, I'm going to wholeheartedly throw my support behind the prAggressive war on what 99.99...% (tired of writing 9's) amounts to superstitious silliness in a country that is supposed to respect your right to superstitious silliness. Don't worry fellow zealots: we can take down the wiccans next.
Ahh...however: This newfound grasp of the obvious represents progress, and is noteworthy.
It may even lead to addressing some genuine, massive problems down the road, what with Clinton's anti-choice "mandates", perpetual wars supported by both popular demobots and republicrats, running the country on a $600B deficit this year and what looks like in perpetuity, abandoning our Constitutional guarantees of freedom and liberty...
...sigh. The obvious is a good place to start, I suppose. Shall we move quickly now? We have some far deadlier pools to fill before we tackle teh dred xchun.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hmmm....?????
Posted by: maribelle
» Apologies. To clarify: There are threats that invoke devout passion among masses.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TheNamelessCity on Feb 14, 2008 9:10 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Right; they openly admitted as much in this state
Posted by: Beck
» RE: white males
Posted by: Dboy
» Right, D-Boy, in a way
Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: IS the men who are most vocal and shrill about it all
Posted by: bitsfick
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dboy on Feb 14, 2008 9:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sec 5: Public Interest and Benefit Activities. The Privacy Rule permits use and
disclosure of protected health information, without an individual’s authorization or
permission, for 12 national priority purposes.
Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to:
(1) public health authorities authorized by law to collect or
receive such information for preventing or controlling disease, injury, or
disability and to public health or other government authorities authorized to
receive reports of child abuse and neglect;
(2) entities subject to FDA
regulation regarding FDA regulated products or activities for purposes such
as adverse event reporting, tracking of products, product recalls, and post-
marketing surveillance;
(3) individuals who may have contracted or been
exposed to a communicable disease when notification is authorized by law;
and
(4) employers, regarding employees, when requested by employers, for
information concerning a work-related illness or injury or workplace related
medical surveillance, because such information is needed by the employer to
comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OHSA),
the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MHSA), or similar state law.
(5)
Victims of Abuse, Neglect or Domestic Violence. In certain circumstances,
covered entities may disclose protected health information to appropriate
government authorities regarding victims of abuse, neglect, or domestic
violence.
(6)
Health Oversight Activities. Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to health oversight agencies (as defined in the Rule) for purposes
of legally authorized health oversight activities, such as audits and
investigations necessary for oversight of the health care system and
government benefit programs.
(7)
Judicial and Administrative Proceedings. Covered entities may disclose
protected health information in a judicial or administrative proceeding if the
request for the information is through an order from a court or administrative
tribunal. Such information may also be disclosed in response to a subpoena
or other lawful process if certain assurances regarding notice to the individual
or a protective order are provided.
(8)
Law Enforcement Purposes. Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to law enforcement officials for law enforcement purposes
(more follows; limited by Alternet post length)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Feb 14, 2008 9:29 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on Feb 14, 2008 11:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Win/Win, I say.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: amien on Feb 14, 2008 11:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, RU-486 is medication that needs to be preceded and followed up on by a medical provider thus necessitating at least two visits to either a clinic, hospital or doctor's office. It's not as if you just call in to your doctor's office and it's waiting for you at the counter. The provider needs to see you, check to see how far along you are, check to see if there's an ectopic pregnancy, make sure you're health allows for this type of medication, etc.
Secondly, for clarification, RU-486 is only used for women who are 9 weeks pregnant or earlier - which does not even encompass the whole first trimester. After that, it's a surgical abortion.
Third, many women do not like medication abortion (RU-486) because, unlike a surgical abortion, where you go into the clinic or office pregnant and come out not pregnant, a medication abortion is a more drawn out process. It takes 2-3 days, there is a lot of bleeding and cramping. Then you go back to the clinic or office to make sure you're not pregnant - to ensure the abortion was complete. If you are, you need a surgical abortion to complete the process. That doesn't happen often but it does happen.
Fourth, for many women it is not feasible for them to spend 2-3 days cramping & bleeding and waiting to pass the pregnancy. They are in an abusive relationship and don't want their partner to know, they have children at home and can't be layed up for days, they need to go back to work immediately (this is an issue for many women who can barely get the one day off for a surgical abortion, let alone three).
Fifth, Sara says that the number of abortion providers has increased according to the Guttmacher study. It is true that the number of providers offering RU-486 has increased but, from my perspective, simply offering RU-486 as another option in your practice does not offset the critically low number of full-fledged abortion providers/women's health centers in this country. Independent abortion providers are closing their doors at an alarming rate - and many of those are full women's health centers that take a wholistic view of women's health; abortion, contraception, annual exams, family planning, STI treatment and testing. Many were feminist in nature and truly understood what it meant to counsel women prior to a procedure, offer comprehensive, woman centered services. I am not convinced that some doctor's simply adding RU-486 is a long term benefit to women and women's health.
Lastly, Sara brings up women not needing to visit a pharmacist for the medication. I think it's important to be clear that there is no abortion medication one can access via a pharmacy. Women can get emergency contraception or Plan B from a pharmacist but not RU-486.
I appreciate Sara's perspective and I don't want to understate how important another safe and effective abortion option is to women and women's health. But I also want to be clear that RU-486 is not a panacea to all of these terrorist attacks nor is it the savior for women's abortion access. There are positives and negatives to this option - though, it is an other option all the same. Thanks for writing this piece, Sara!
Amie Newman
RH Reality Check
www.rhrealitycheck.org
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This article is well-intentioned but contains errors
Posted by: Mrs. Robinson
» RE: This article is well-intentioned but contains errors
Posted by: thealltheone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bobtr900 on Feb 14, 2008 2:12 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks to Pope John Paul II(my religion but not me) and his brethren Jerry Falwell who put Reagan into the WH what is left of America and our now shredded Constitution is almost damaged beyond all recognition. America has become a killer nation and for corporate profits, oil profits, and the Bush/Cheney family and the Bin Laden family profits. The Bush and Bin Laden families are co-investors in the Carlyle Group, a group of war profiteers.
But they all insist this is pro-life and family values. And the Popes of my religion have been supporting them since the days of Reagan. It is a Satanic pact.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dboy on Feb 15, 2008 4:00 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I view this issue as yet another attempt by various forces to demonstrate authority over others. Ultimately this is a power play, not a morality play. Arguing the 'where does life begin' question really doesn't do much for either side. Religionists really don't take science seriously anyway, and merely use the question as a device to intrude in areas they have no knowledge of.
An alternate way of asking this 'where does life begin' question would be to ask the christian 'when does God inject the newly-created soul into a developing organism?", and "are these NEW souls, or are they re-used after the death of a previous human?"; "do sperm cells have a soul?. If not, how can you tell? Thy certainly look alive under a microscope." They will quote various passages out of the only book they know how to read in an attempt to answer these questions. One easy response to this tactic, is by quoting Genesis 2:7 "...God breathed life into Adam", therefore live begins at birth, not conception. The bible is confusing enough when dealing with this topic that they cannot win this argument based on their magic book, and therefore will fall back on a moral argument. Flustered by getting in over their heads, the babbling christian will be sent back to his mother-ship to get advanced counseling/brainwashing.
dboy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thealltheone on Feb 16, 2008 12:29 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
100% prolife philosophy, shocking site
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» pharmacists for life international
Posted by: zipper696
» They WOULD be outraged if we found out they have diabetes...
Posted by: Callibrarian
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Turiye on Feb 14, 2008 2:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will seek them out like a pitbull if they come near mine.
These young women have no idea what we've endured. What will those horrid Seniors do now? Maybe a real live child that needs love, support and healthcare. 'YA THINK?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And The Answer Is...
Posted by: bobtr900
» RE: It is about time, but damned if we do and....
Posted by: lenioui
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Turiye on Feb 14, 2008 2:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will seek them out like a pitbull if they come near mine.
These young women have no idea what we've endured. What will those horrid Seniors do now? Maybe a real live child that needs love, support and healthcare. 'YA THINK?"
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: d.nweindeb on Feb 14, 2008 2:53 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: d.nweindeb
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: JSquercia
» AND pro-lifers seem to have more abortions than pro-choicers
Posted by: Beck
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: Hypocrites, full speed ahead!
Posted by: d.nweindeb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Feb 14, 2008 4:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: if you are against abortion, don't have one
Posted by: Moira61
Comments are closed-
Posted by: colinmeister on Feb 14, 2008 5:16 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: jmmartin on Feb 14, 2008 5:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A: Drug stores that carry it?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: TheNamelessCity
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: willymack
» RE: insiders
Posted by: Dboy
» RE: insiders
Posted by: IntlDad
» RE: Who's Next?
Posted by: Xynyx
» RE: the problem
Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: thealltheone
» RE: Who's Next? Drug stores that carry it?
Posted by: lepidopteryx
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AnIndependentThinker on Feb 14, 2008 5:43 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I personally do not agree with abortion, it is not my right as an individual to make that choice for someone else. Nor is it the right of a radical terrorist to make that decision either. If anti-abortion bombers think that God loves them for killing more people for the life of a fetus, then they are obviously not working in the name of God.
And I agree, had these anti-abortion bombers and murderers been of Muslim origins, I am certain that this nation would be up in arms and ready to go after the "evil-doers."
Great article. Great topic. Sheer truth.
Thanks for sharing this piece.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Kudos to Sara Robinson
Posted by: babs
Comments are closed-
Posted by: solrev on Feb 14, 2008 5:47 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: don't bogart that RU-486
Posted by: Sushi
» RE: don't bogart that RU-486
Posted by: ALANHESTER
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Opinionator on Feb 14, 2008 5:49 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: constitution, what constitution on Feb 14, 2008 6:08 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the anti-choicers will realize what they need to do is spend some of that energy educating people so abortion rates drop. Man, that's crazy talk!
The only negative here is that I'm going to eventually lose a group of people to mock when I walk by my local clinic. You should see the expressions on their faces when they're kneeling in front of the clinic praying and crying and you walk by and laugh at them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: People Outraged by Invasion of Privacy?
Posted by: babs
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JSquercia on Feb 14, 2008 6:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not believe that these laws should be upheld . That is the profession they chose and so long as the perscription is legal there should be NO right to refuse to fill it . The impact would of be far greater in smaller communities which would have fewer Pharmacys . In cities and suburbs there are usually multiple Pharamcy's . We will soon have 3 in
four block area where I live in Nassau County NY .
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: New tactic
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: New tactic
Posted by: praedor
» Imagine...
Posted by: zipper696
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Johnboy on Feb 14, 2008 6:58 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: enlightened **BACK TO THE FARM, JOHNBOY**
Posted by: maribelle
» If one of your neighbors bombed your house,
Posted by: hurricane hugo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: praedor on Feb 14, 2008 7:00 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The situation is a little better with NON-RU-486 drugs. Virtually ANY anti-cancer chemotherapeutic drug can be used to terminate a pregnancy. You cannot prevent terrorist agents from going to various doctors and saying they're preggers and want to end it to identify those that will prescribe drugs to terminate pregnancies, but it WOULD render impotent the pharmacists that would act as "moral gatekeepers" and otherwise deny women their birth control or abortion drugs: they cannot deny a woman her chemotherapeutic and there is no way for the pharmacist to know whether a woman with a prescription for methotrexate is pregnant or actually has cancer needing treatment.
RU-486 helps but it is hardly an answer. It would help a great deal if the drug had more widespread AND KNOWN use beyond simply terminating pregnancy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» One drug in RU-486 is Cytotex -- the 50-cent anti-ulcer drug now used across Latin Am to abort
Posted by: janvdb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bitsfick on Feb 14, 2008 7:14 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Nazis
Posted by: Capybara
» RE: How can someone be a "good Christian" and abolish the church?
Posted by: bitsfick
Comments are closed-
Posted by: JSquercia on Feb 14, 2008 7:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I realise it somewhat off topic but the very idea of Privacy means NOTHING to These people
EXCEPT of course THEIR privacy which is protected by Executive Privelege and Deleted
E mails .
Scary thought is once Medical Records are no longer Private it will only be a matter of time before Insurance Companies gain access to them and use them to restrict Medical Coverage .
Imagine what they could do with DNA . If your DNA shows a genetic disposition towards some
disease NO insurance for YOU .
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Privacy There is no Stinkin Privacy
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Privacy There is no Stinkin Privacy
Posted by: willymack
» RE: Privacy and single payer government healthcare!
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE:No insurance for you!
Posted by: Sushi
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gottabeme on Feb 14, 2008 7:18 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: praedor
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: gottabeme
» RE: U-486 still requires clinic visits
Posted by: LRayn
Comments are closed-
Posted by: scott balogh on Feb 14, 2008 7:21 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: youngdem
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: plantsareneat
» RE: A human life begins.... When? **SINCERE ANSWER**
Posted by: maribelle
» Thanks, maribelle. I should have read you first.
Posted by: Beck
» RE: Thanks, maribelle. I should have read you first. ALWAYS A PLEASURE, BECK
Posted by: maribelle
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: LRayn
» None of us needs to make decisions based on YOUR feelings
Posted by: Beck
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: babs
» RE: A human life begins.... When?
Posted by: RosieRivetor
» "Human life" has no beginning and no ending
Posted by: chief of okeefe
» RE: OK,OK!!
Posted by: scott balogh
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT**
Posted by: maribelle
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT**
Posted by: scott balogh
» RE: OK,OK!! **IT"S NOT ABOUT YOU SCOTT****STAY IN YOUR OWN YARD< SCOTT**
Posted by: maribelle
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pikaomega on Feb 14, 2008 7:30 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I grew up with an extremely abusive father, leading of course to all kinds of "Daddy issues" that have haunted me in my own relationships; I am BiPolar I, which has led to several psychiatric hospitalizations and requires massive amounts of medication every day to simply keep me alive; I was in a auto accident at the age of 20 which mangled me internally, claiming organs and rendering my liver, kidneys and pancreas sub-functional. But, most importantly, I have never wanted children. I have no maternal drive, and not once have I thought to myself "I want a baby." In light of all of this, I decided at a young age (I am now 28) that I wanted a tubal ligation. I am blessed to have a family that stood behind my decision, and though they mourned the loss of what I would never have, they understood that this was the route that I needed to take. My mother is a nurse, my biggest champion and my fiercest critic. We repeatedly assessed the situation, and both came to the conclusion that a.) I would most likely not be able to physically handle a pregnancy, b.) I could not put a child through seeing their mother in a psychotic state, and c.) The responsible choice was to opt to prevent a situation (though amazingly effective, no birth control is 100% and mistakes happen) that would result in an abortion.
I was told that I would have to wait until I turned 25 before any doctor would even discuss the proceedure with me. So, in 2005, I began the daunting task of finding an OBGYN that I could meet with. I am not insured, but had the cash in hand for the operation. I began contacting offices, and I was astounded by what I found.
I was told, ad nauseum, that despite all of the logical, pragmatic reasons for me to undergo this surgery, I was simply confused and that no doctor would talk to me...I didn't know what I wanted. I would change my mind. Come now, don't you want to be a mommy? Sure you do. We can give you birth control. IUD. Depo. The pill. I was hung up on, laughed at, lectured and scorned.
After four and one half months, I finally found a doctor willing to see me. The surgery was a breeze, and three years later, I still regard it to be the best decision that I have ever made.
My point is this: Why is it that I could elect to have an abortion as a teenager, but as an adult with serious mental, emotional and physical afflictions I was deemed unfit to make the decision that the best course of action for me was to take abortion and pregnancy off of the table all together? I am, ABSOLUTELY, in favor of practicality when dealing with birth control and abortion. I was fortunate to have a mother that was totally open and honest when these topics arose, and that gave me the infomation necessary to take responsible measures to prevent negative consequences. I am simply saying that we seem to put the cart before the horse here. Abortion should be available, safe and infrequent. But playing politics with the health of millions of women is what breeds the shame and misinformation that result in unwanted pregnancies.
I would say to all of you that have young daughters, my mother's openness and honesty set in me a deep trust for which I am forever thankful. I was never made to feel ashamed, and was rightfully taught that sexuality is at the foundation of human nature. Because of this, I never hesitated to ask her about birth control and abortion, and had faith that the advice I was given was honest and in my best interest. This discussion is what prevents disasterous situations. We know that moralizing doctors and pharmacists exists, and you can never be sure that the advice you're given is medical or moral. Be your daughter's first line of defense, they will be forever grateful.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Doctors looking after their own interests
Posted by: colinmeister
» RE: Through the looking glass...
Posted by: dudelette
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Feb 14, 2008 8:13 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
# 17 attempted murders
# 383 death threats
# 153 incidents of assault and battery
# 3 kidnappings
# 41 bombings
# 173 arsons
# 91 attempted bombings or arsons
# 619 bomb threats
# 655 bioterror attacks (all hoaxes), 554 of which were committed by one man
I wonder how these stats over the past 30 years would compare with number of violent crimes committed in the name of scoring a fix (a different drug from ru-486, mind you) in the previous year alone.
These stats do confirm that in a nation of 300M, we have some very whacked individuals, to the point that an average citizen on an average day "enjoyed" the chance to encounter an anti-choice oriented whackjob that would kill them on the order of 7/30*365*300000 = 2.13x10-9 (a tad off, as I just used the latest census for the population).
Nevertheless, this tells us the dire grip that anti-abortion advocates grip our country: you're only 100,000 or so times more likely to die in an airplane crash than as a result of abortion on a baptist pulpit. Or somewhat thereabouts...
Oh those deadly christians. As soon as we get done banning planes, pools, and cars, I'm going to wholeheartedly throw my support behind the prAggressive war on what 99.99...% (tired of writing 9's) amounts to superstitious silliness in a country that is supposed to respect your right to superstitious silliness. Don't worry fellow zealots: we can take down the wiccans next.
Ahh...however: This newfound grasp of the obvious represents progress, and is noteworthy.
It may even lead to addressing some genuine, massive problems down the road, what with Clinton's anti-choice "mandates", perpetual wars supported by both popular demobots and republicrats, running the country on a $600B deficit this year and what looks like in perpetuity, abandoning our Constitutional guarantees of freedom and liberty...
...sigh. The obvious is a good place to start, I suppose. Shall we move quickly now? We have some far deadlier pools to fill before we tackle teh dred xchun.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Hmmm....?????
Posted by: maribelle
» Apologies. To clarify: There are threats that invoke devout passion among masses.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TheNamelessCity on Feb 14, 2008 9:10 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Right; they openly admitted as much in this state
Posted by: Beck
» RE: white males
Posted by: Dboy
» Right, D-Boy, in a way
Posted by: Aimleft
» RE: IS the men who are most vocal and shrill about it all
Posted by: bitsfick
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dboy on Feb 14, 2008 9:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sec 5: Public Interest and Benefit Activities. The Privacy Rule permits use and
disclosure of protected health information, without an individual’s authorization or
permission, for 12 national priority purposes.
Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to:
(1) public health authorities authorized by law to collect or
receive such information for preventing or controlling disease, injury, or
disability and to public health or other government authorities authorized to
receive reports of child abuse and neglect;
(2) entities subject to FDA
regulation regarding FDA regulated products or activities for purposes such
as adverse event reporting, tracking of products, product recalls, and post-
marketing surveillance;
(3) individuals who may have contracted or been
exposed to a communicable disease when notification is authorized by law;
and
(4) employers, regarding employees, when requested by employers, for
information concerning a work-related illness or injury or workplace related
medical surveillance, because such information is needed by the employer to
comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OHSA),
the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MHSA), or similar state law.
(5)
Victims of Abuse, Neglect or Domestic Violence. In certain circumstances,
covered entities may disclose protected health information to appropriate
government authorities regarding victims of abuse, neglect, or domestic
violence.
(6)
Health Oversight Activities. Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to health oversight agencies (as defined in the Rule) for purposes
of legally authorized health oversight activities, such as audits and
investigations necessary for oversight of the health care system and
government benefit programs.
(7)
Judicial and Administrative Proceedings. Covered entities may disclose
protected health information in a judicial or administrative proceeding if the
request for the information is through an order from a court or administrative
tribunal. Such information may also be disclosed in response to a subpoena
or other lawful process if certain assurances regarding notice to the individual
or a protective order are provided.
(8)
Law Enforcement Purposes. Covered entities may disclose protected health
information to law enforcement officials for law enforcement purposes
(more follows; limited by Alternet post length)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Feb 14, 2008 9:29 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: meetmeineleusis on Feb 14, 2008 11:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Win/Win, I say.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: amien on Feb 14, 2008 11:31 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First off, RU-486 is medication that needs to be preceded and followed up on by a medical provider thus necessitating at least two visits to either a clinic, hospital or doctor's office. It's not as if you just call in to your doctor's office and it's waiting for you at the counter. The provider needs to see you, check to see how far along you are, check to see if there's an ectopic pregnancy, make sure you're health allows for this type of medication, etc.
Secondly, for clarification, RU-486 is only used for women who are 9 weeks pregnant or earlier - which does not even encompass the whole first trimester. After that, it's a surgical abortion.
Third, many women do not like medication abortion (RU-486) because, unlike a surgical abortion, where you go into the clinic or office pregnant and come out not pregnant, a medication abortion is a more drawn out process. It takes 2-3 days, there is a lot of bleeding and cramping. Then you go back to the clinic or office to make sure you're not pregnant - to ensure the abortion was complete. If you are, you need a surgical abortion to complete the process. That doesn't happen often but it does happen.
Fourth, for many women it is not feasible for them to spend 2-3 days cramping & bleeding and waiting to pass the pregnancy. They are in an abusive relationship and don't want their partner to know, they have children at home and can't be layed up for days, they need to go back to work immediately (this is an issue for many women who can barely get the one day off for a surgical abortion, let alone three).
Fifth, Sara says that the number of abortion providers has increased according to the Guttmacher study. It is true that the number of providers offering RU-486 has increased but, from my perspective, simply offering RU-486 as another option in your practice does not offset the critically low number of full-fledged abortion providers/women's health centers in this country. Independent abortion providers are closing their doors at an alarming rate - and many of those are full women's health centers that take a wholistic view of women's health; abortion, contraception, annual exams, family planning, STI treatment and testing. Many were feminist in nature and truly understood what it meant to counsel women prior to a procedure, offer comprehensive, woman centered services. I am not convinced that some doctor's simply adding RU-486 is a long term benefit to women and women's health.
Lastly, Sara brings up women not needing to visit a pharmacist for the medication. I think it's important to be clear that there is no abortion medication one can access via a pharmacy. Women can get emergency contraception or Plan B from a pharmacist but not RU-486.
I appreciate Sara's perspective and I don't want to understate how important another safe and effective abortion option is to women and women's health. But I also want to be clear that RU-486 is not a panacea to all of these terrorist attacks nor is it the savior for women's abortion access. There are positives and negatives to this option - though, it is an other option all the same. Thanks for writing this piece, Sara!
Amie Newman
RH Reality Check
www.rhrealitycheck.org
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This article is well-intentioned but contains errors
Posted by: Mrs. Robinson
» RE: This article is well-intentioned but contains errors
Posted by: thealltheone
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bobtr900 on Feb 14, 2008 2:12 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks to Pope John Paul II(my religion but not me) and his brethren Jerry Falwell who put Reagan into the WH what is left of America and our now shredded Constitution is almost damaged beyond all recognition. America has become a killer nation and for corporate profits, oil profits, and the Bush/Cheney family and the Bin Laden family profits. The Bush and Bin Laden families are co-investors in the Carlyle Group, a group of war profiteers.
But they all insist this is pro-life and family values. And the Popes of my religion have been supporting them since the days of Reagan. It is a Satanic pact.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dboy on Feb 15, 2008 4:00 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I view this issue as yet another attempt by various forces to demonstrate authority over others. Ultimately this is a power play, not a morality play. Arguing the 'where does life begin' question really doesn't do much for either side. Religionists really don't take science seriously anyway, and merely use the question as a device to intrude in areas they have no knowledge of.
An alternate way of asking this 'where does life begin' question would be to ask the christian 'when does God inject the newly-created soul into a developing organism?", and "are these NEW souls, or are they re-used after the death of a previous human?"; "do sperm cells have a soul?. If not, how can you tell? Thy certainly look alive under a microscope." They will quote various passages out of the only book they know how to read in an attempt to answer these questions. One easy response to this tactic, is by quoting Genesis 2:7 "...God breathed life into Adam", therefore live begins at birth, not conception. The bible is confusing enough when dealing with this topic that they cannot win this argument based on their magic book, and therefore will fall back on a moral argument. Flustered by getting in over their heads, the babbling christian will be sent back to his mother-ship to get advanced counseling/brainwashing.
dboy
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thealltheone on Feb 16, 2008 12:29 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
100% prolife philosophy, shocking site
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» pharmacists for life international
Posted by: zipper696
Updated: Catholic Bishops Embrace Anti-Abortion Terrorizers Missy Smith and Randall Terry
10 Defining Feminist Moments of 2009
Going Undercover in the Crazy, Tragic World of Christian Gay-Conversion Therapy




