Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Reproductive Justice and Gender

In Med Schools, the Abortion Curriculum Has Left the Classroom

By Louisa Pyle, RH Reality Check. Posted April 15, 2008.


In a sane world, abortion would be included in medical school curriculum where appropriate, just like any other common, safe procedure.
04mwl228at
ms4c
Advertisement

Originally posted at RH Reality Check.

As recently as six or seven years ago, abortion was included in my medical school's curriculum, but no longer. The comprehensive curriculum I naively expected that would provide medical students with the knowledge to meet the common needs of their female patients simply does not exist. At a party last weekend I asked a few second years, four twenty-three-year-old men, to report back to me if they hear the "A" word at any time this semester. They gleefully dubbed themselves the "Medical Student Moles for Choice." Abortion is a shadow that wisps in and out of medicine, much like the quiet shadow of abortion in many women's lives, not addressed directly, not discussed in coffee shops or over family dinner.

Medical school is, in many ways, a language school. Someone told me once that a medical student learns over 20,000 new words in their first two years of school, and in addition to the new vocabulary, I soon became capable of saying things over dinner that one should never say. "Rectum" no longer induces giggles and "vagina" is boring, not sexy or empowering. And yet, the word "abortion" is still said with a pause, a nod, a little quieter than the rest of the sentence. I'm happy when we talk about it at all: for me, the problem is the deafening silence. That a procedure more common than an appendectomy would never be named: In the halls of science and healthcare, that to me is an abomination.

At one time at my medical school, a state institution of strong reputation in the Deep South, the physician responsible for the classroom teaching in women's reproductive health, "Dr. L," included a full hour lecture on the medicine and science of abortion care in the OB/Gyn curriculum. She included her own stories of patients, the hooks on which we medical students hang all this physiology and chemistry in our overtaxed memories. Even so, the students of this relatively conservative locale responded with powerfully reproachful marks on the course feedback forms. As student feedback influences not only the next year's teaching of any course but also the tenure and performance assessment of the teachers, physicians, themselves, Dr. L. was forced to remove the lecture. During the following few years, including my turn with her, she managed to sneak in ten minutes on abortion safety when discussing contraception. "Abortion is safe," was the message I heard, "but if you have a problem with it, you better be sure you know how to offer your patients appropriate birth control."

The real blow didn't come until the following year. Dr. L. moved on to another institution. With her went any mention of the science and medicine of abortion; the ethics class debate on the subject remains. This is how abortion education disappears from our medical schools - subtly and quietly. The students come and go, teaching physicians come and go, and few of us notice this loss from the classroom, the laboratory, the hospital room.

Is it hopeless? Of course not. I have a dream curriculum, and I believe it can be attained. Including questions on abortion and other aspects of comprehensive reproductive healthcare in national medical board exams would re-enforce to medical schools that the subject should and must be taught. Recommended curricula from professional bodies like ACOG (the American College of OB/Gyns) could encourage directors of curricula at both the medical school and residency level to include abortion care requirements. Specific line item requirements from the national accreditation bodies could remind medical school deans every eight years that abortion is part of normal medical care. Until that day comes, with the support of Medical Students for Choice, we students will continue to fight for our own education. At the University of Alabama at Birmingham, we've invited abortion providers to talk with us about their careers and to teach us about the practicalities of the abortion procedure and running a practice, shadowed providers at a local clinic, and lobbied the administration for permanent, sustainable curricular change.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: abortion, healthcare, reproductive justice, medical students for choi

Louisa Pyle is the President of Medical Students for Choice, a bi-national grassroots nonprofit organization that focuses on creating tomorrow's abortion providers and pro-choice physicians by improving reproductive education in medical schools.

Her day job is as an MD and PhD student at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Abortion...
Posted by: Smartcookie on Apr 15, 2008 2:47 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is no need to be so disturbed by the lack of 'abortion' since any med student worth his or her salt will ask questions or learn more on their own, not to mention there is so much to cover in a med school curriculum, you'd have to be pretty weak to knee-jerk over it.

Abortion is not exactly cutting edge medicine, the reason the medical profession see's abortion is largely a matter of irresponsible people.

The fact that women keep harping about abortion is evidence of these women's stupidity (not to damn all of you women ou there), why oh why would you even have unprotected sex if it was going to lead to fertilizaton of an egg? Abortion in trying circumstances or by accident is valid, using it as a form of birth control is not.

Whenever I hear abortion I think: Are there not greater problems in this world then the killing of unformed human beings by irresponsible people? And lets be frank, everyone who is a human being is a fully developed end result of the embryo.

I'm neither pro life, nor pro abortion, since the issue is more complex then for or against, would you want to have been aborted your only chance at conscious existence?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Abortion... Posted by: bouyant
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: Smartcookie
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: e rice
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: Smartcookie
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: penstamen
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: incest,rape, Posted by: cwilsondrum
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: marilee
» RE: Abortion... Posted by: hugh7
» Give me a break! Posted by: J_Mo
» RE: Give me a break! Posted by: J_Mo
The Alternative is Ugly
Posted by: AlexLawyer on Apr 15, 2008 2:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we're going to take safe, professional abortion out of the curriculum, we'd better replace teaching about this relatively simple procedure with lots of lectures about diagnosis, intensive care and surgery for women with ruptured uteruses, punctured bowels and septic shock. In the pre-Roe days the abortion rate was as high as now, but the complications were much higher because desperate women were forced to use back-alley quacks instead of qualified specialists.

The radical right does not care that outlawing abortion will not decrease the rate, nor that it will imperil the lives and health of millions of women. They'd rather be self-rightous than right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Alternative is Ugly Posted by: e rice
» The reality isn't? Posted by: pfeifer999
» No, it's not repeated.... Posted by: morticia
En-Darkenment
Posted by: talkville on Apr 15, 2008 3:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Word "Abortion" has a long and twisting etymology winding all the way back to Greco-Latin times.

For the medical practice and procedure as part of a general curriculum in the training of medical workers to be relegated to "self-teaching" and "back-room" brushing up, is but an indictment of the sorry state of what goes under the general term "Academia". Especially in these days of Form and Values, when those who feel Guilty about "eating from the tree of Knowledge" and resist it in so many ways, it's nothing short of a travesty that institutions bearing the name "Medical School" are succumbing to these same guilts. Not only can knowledge and understanding and the search for truth be gained; it can also be lost, and in surprisingly short generational time.

Those who long for that "Lost Innocence" and a return to some Eden prior to ingestion of the Apple have gained much ground. Even in the Academy (which, we must remember, emerged and formed itself out of those medieval cloisters and monasteries of long ago named "Universities". Perhaps the Academy is "returning to its roots"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you
Posted by: jnelson4765 on Apr 15, 2008 3:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Abortion is a hard thing to go through, but having caring professionals who can help women through a hard choice is absolutely necessary. It's heartening to see that there are people coming through school with the courage to provide these procedures, and honest counselling.

I had not known that the teaching of abortion is being silenced in medical schools - that is a distressing trend. I only hope that you and yours manage to stop that before there is no place to get an abortion because no one knows how to do it...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thank you Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: Thank you Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Thank you Posted by: Vik
» RE: Thank you Posted by: e rice
» Liar? Posted by: pfeifer999
What? You Don"t Feel The Love Of Christ?
Posted by: LMNOP on Apr 15, 2008 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like institutionalized homophobia, his is just another glaring example of the price that all of us pay for the privilege of living among Christians.

Christianity is like a cancer on this government, and the abortion issue is just another metastasis, like the ban on stem-cell research and equal rights for homosexuals. People need to learn that even if most rank-and-file Christians are nice, Christianity is not; That it is anti-freedom, anti-democracy, anti-woman and anti-human; that it will work continually and tirelessly to thwart freedoms and democratic principles, and impose theocracy on them in its place because it is committed to expunging the freedoms and rights people have claimed for themselves and imposing its own order, which it claims is divine in origin, but is, of course, nothing more than the ancient older that we have spent millennia trying to overthrow; that it is diametrically opposed to democratic power structures, preferring instead authoritarian regimes (God doesn't ask questions or count hands); that it seeks to demean man, who Christianity calls a wretched sinner, and his ideas; that it violently opposes humanism and individualism, proclaiming that man is incapable of contributing anything of value to the world of ideas and is lost without external constraints, which are strictly the providence of the deity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I ALMOST had one. Posted by: J_Mo
» cancer? Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: cancer? Posted by: cmaciain
» actions or words? Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: cmaciain
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: pfeifer999
» I was raised Catholic. Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: I was raised Catholic. Posted by: pfeifer999
» "Did you ever think..." Posted by: J_Mo
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: actions or words? Posted by: pfeifer999
It's all about
Posted by: Marlena on Apr 15, 2008 7:04 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
males controlling female sexuality. Always has been. Ever see "anti abortionists"?? most of them are male...and its males who have fought against it for centuries....i guess a lot of them still believe in the "sacred and holy sperm" and that harming it once its implanted in an egg is tantamount to killing god. The main reason for the witch killings was to get rid of the wise women, who know how to prevent or end pregnancy...cant let women have that kind of control over their body's. So the anti female misogynists are nothing new, we have had them around for thousands of years. These people are extremely anti democratic, and such people hate America with a passion

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's all about Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» Hey Jimmy Posted by: LMNOP
» Hey Doctor Posted by: pfeifer999
» Pfeiffer, my friend Posted by: LMNOP
» Yes, good Doctor Posted by: pfeifer999
» More on morality Posted by: LMNOP
» how dare you? Posted by: e rice
» RE: how dare you? Posted by: pfeifer999
» no, I'm not sure I understand Posted by: pfeifer999
» or maybe...... Posted by: pfeifer999
» They Know About It Posted by: Arlene
» RE: It's all about Posted by: opalescentscales
» RE: It's all about Posted by: Crazy H
Right-wing, theocratic legislation endangers young women's lives
Posted by: JimmyVaughan on Apr 15, 2008 7:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Clearly, making abortion illegal, except when a woman's life is threatened, does not protect women or their lives. Ominously, today 43 states restrict a young woman's access to abortion by mandating parental consent.

Back alley abortions are potentially deadly. Many women who went to illegal abortionists were often blindfolded and had abortions under conditions of extreme secrecy. Many women who braved these "procedures" survived, but some died and many more were seriously injured.

Prior to Roe v. Wade, many hospitals had separate abortion wards for women bleeding, injured and infected due to illegal abortions. Tragically, many of these women had tried to abort by themselves.

According to the US government's own data, deaths due to illegal abortion approached 50 percent of the nation's total maternal mortality.

Abortions performed by well-trained physicians in sterile environments are extremely safe. After abortion was legalized in the United States, maternal mortality rates fell dramatically. Miraculously, hospital abortion wards closed because they were empty.

Insane legislation crafted by right-wing ideologues and theocrats restrict young women's access to abortion: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Obviously, right-wing ideologues have taken it upon themselves to place our daughter's in danger--they care not one iota who they harm as long as they are allowed to shove their "morality" down the collective throat's of the remainder of the nation.

And now right-wing crackpots and bible-thumping authoritarians work endlessly to inject their poison into our nation's medical schools; further endangering our daughter's lives as a consequence.

My question is simple: When will We The People enforce--by violence, if necessary--the separation of church and state granted to each and every one of us by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

Clearly, our daughter's deserve no less, and we fail them--not to mention endanger their lives--as long as we allow right-wing, theocratic bullies to poison our laws with legislation designed to "regulate morality."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hey now Posted by: LMNOP
» not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: Crazy H
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» reading your posts Posted by: goatini
» oh please, this is laughable Posted by: goatini
» glad I gave you a laugh Posted by: pfeifer999
» OK wireup, sounds good Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: wireup
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: e rice
» RE: not a religious issue Posted by: pfeifer999
» my own little fan club Posted by: e rice
» RE: my own little fan club Posted by: pfeifer999
» No! Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: No! Posted by: e rice
» i just had a better idea Posted by: e rice
» OK Wireup, thanks Posted by: pfeifer999
» OK Wireup, thanks.... Posted by: pfeifer999
» "OK Wireup, thanks.... Posted by: goatini
» Thanks Goatini Posted by: pfeifer999
» how very interesting Posted by: goatini
» interesting indeed Posted by: pfeifer999
"...common, safe procedure..."
Posted by: pfeifer999 on Apr 15, 2008 9:48 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"In a sane world, abortion would be included in medical school curriculum where appropriate, just like any other common, safe procedure."

Setting up a gas chamber, a firing squad, a noose, or an electric chair, those are all safe and common procedures. The frontal lobotomy is medically safe, and was once quite common. Should those procedures also be on the medical school curriculum where appropriate?

There is one interesting point buried in this article. Medical school is to a large degree a language or vocabulary school, and the language taught and learned there changes how the students live out their practice.

For example, we've invented a generic procedure that we call "abortion", instead of using the more medically accurate but more cumbersome descriptions "massive interutero toxin injection, followed by dilettage and curettage" or "fetal dissection and removal by suction based immolation device."

But why is it that when something happens that doesn't fit the progressive orthodoxy, we all start blaming some huge Christian - neocon conspiracy, perpetrated by mouth-breating fundamentalists, or start whining about how middle American ignorance is standing in the way of progress?

What the authors (and it seems many of the posters) don't want to come to grips with is that there is no "endarkening" conspiracy to gag the white-hat-wearing abortion lobby. There are some very good reasons based in economics and conscience that explain why the medical schools want nothing to do with abortion, among them:

--- medical professionals have to know something about embryology and early human physiology as incoming undergraduates, so they know that the series of procedures generically referred to as "abortion" ends a human life nearly ever time they're performed

--- our insurance companies and our litigious society have have driven a lot of the profit out of the medical profession over the last 15 years. Most people entering the profession today are doing it because they genuinely care about human health, life, and happiness, not about money. So despite the anecdotal "moles" referred to in the article, the current crop of medical professionals are generally not attracted to abortion, which is after all a quick, low-involvement, $400 procedure that can be done 20 times a day in a cheap clinic with minimal equipment. In short, they want to practice real medicine.

--- demand for abortion is at its lowest point since the early 90's, despite all of the efforts by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and NOW to legitimize it, and to silence the opposing voices by invoking RICO statute and civil lawsuit

As someone who has been involved in counseling post-abortion trauma victims (at least the victim who survived the procedure), the most shocking part of this article for me was the smiling faces of people proudly standing behind their "we are tomorrow's abortion providers" sign.

Cure for cancer? Cure for AIDS? Triage for natural disaster victims in Latin America? Wouldn't those be nobler futures?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "...common, safe procedure..." Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» Under what circumstances.... Posted by: morticia
» RE: Under what circumstances.... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Under what circumstances.... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Under what circumstances.... Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: so people who wilfully ignore Posted by: pfeifer999
» okay, it's a Posted by: goatini
» Goatini is ignoring the post Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: Goatini is ignoring the post Posted by: opalescentscales
» Goatini, face the facts Posted by: pfeifer999
» Hey! Again! Yo! Over here! Posted by: morticia
» OK Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: OK Posted by: morticia
» the weight is your own Posted by: pfeifer999
» ROTFLMAO!!!!!! Posted by: JimmyVaughan
» EXCLAMATION POINTS!!! Posted by: pfeifer999
» Never agree with me? Posted by: morticia
» always putting words in my mouth Posted by: pfeifer999
» OK sounds good, thanks Posted by: pfeifer999
» SD, thanks for your perspective Posted by: pfeifer999
» prosecute, not persecute Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: morticia
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: morticia
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: pfeifer999
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: morticia
» RE: prosecute, not persecute Posted by: pfeifer999
» See "keep talking" post below Posted by: morticia
» Okay. Review your... Posted by: morticia
» Yikes Posted by: LMNOP
Abortion
Posted by: bettyn on Apr 15, 2008 11:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the goverment forcing women to bring to term babies with severe birth defects (that will render such children helpless for their entire lives)by essentially outlawing abortions of any kind; said government should PAY 100% of the care of these unfortunate children for however long they happen to live.

Also, the same terms apply if the mother dies during childbirth: 100% care by the feds if the baby lives, and a huge settlement of no less than one million dollars per child if the family has other children who must grow up with-out her. Her widower gets a million also.

Finally, no DEATH PENALTY, period. Enough is enough. Once the fat cats start getting pinched for the taxes THIS law would require, we'll stop hearing about "outlawing abortion".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]