rhrealitycheck
Log in to comment or register to create your own blog
Written by Sarah Fisher for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
See all our coverage of the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar here.
As an organisation that hears first-hand from the women who bear the burden of Ireland's archaic abortion laws, the tragic death of Savita Halappanavar was shocking and sickening.
And yet not as surprising as you'd think.
Given that abortion laws in Ireland are among the strictest in the world, a tragedy of this kind wasn't so much a matter of if, but when. The circumstances in which Savita died are truly abhorrent. Admitted to hospital experiencing a miscarriage at 17 weeks, despite being told that the fetus "wasn't viable" she was made to suffer for days, left begging for an abortion that she was refused as long as there was a foetal heart beat.
Haunted by the harrowing details of Savita's death we're left to wonder how many more women in Ireland may have lost their lives as a result of being denied a life-saving abortion.
If Savita's family hadn't bravely made the decision to go public, would her senseless death have come to light? Have the lives of more women been sacrificed because a fetus was deemed more important? Even when it was known that the fetus would not survive? When, technically in Ireland an abortion is permitted if there is a "real and substantial risk to the life of the mother?" These are questions that we cannot ignore and questions that demand answers.
Savita's death is the worst illustration of what happens when abortion is highly restricted, and the worst way for the 'pro-life' lobby to be proved wrong. How often do we hear that abortion is never necessary to save the life of a woman? A protester at a vigil for Savita hit the nail on the head with a placard stating 'Pro-Life beliefs killed Savita Halappanavar -- Ireland needs abortion rights.' So did Kartha Pollit in her compelling reflection on the case When 'Pro-Life' kills.
But what has been absent from the mainstream media coverage of Savita's death has been the mass, day-in day-out misery and discrimination experienced by women as a result of the near-total ban on abortion in Ireland.
Because for every tragic death like Savita's there are many, many more victims of Ireland's abortion laws who, though they don't pay with their lives, are made to endure hardship, shame and violations of their basic rights. It's also important that their plight isn't ignored.
Written by Andrea Grimes for RH Reality Check . This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
The new executive commissioner of Texas' Health and Human Services Department -- the social services behemoth that's currently in the process of building a whole new Texas Women's Health Program (WHP) so it can exclude Planned Parenthood from providing contraceptives and cancer screenings to low-income Texans -- has some interesting views on the condition of public health care in his state. And by "interesting," I mean shocking. I mean shockingly ignorant. Astounding, even.
Dr. Kyle Janek is an anesthesiologist by training, but for the last 18 years has served as a Republican in the Texas Legislature and as a lobbyist for various medical organizations. Governor Rick Perry appointed him as executive commissioner of the Texas HHSC on September 1st. You might expect that in 18 years of being plugged into Texas politics and state health policy, he'd have a decent grasp on the issues facing Texans.
You'd be wrong. Because Kyle Janek doesn't believe -- despite credible, widely accepted evidence to the contrary -- that one of Texas' most pressing health problems, its high number of uninsured adults, is real. He doesn't believe that more than a quarter of Texans are uninsured, as estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau. He told a Texas Tribune reporter in early October that he believed that number to be "inflated," and then reiterated his point in an extended interview with Tribune editor Evan Smith on October 31st. (Through his press representatives, he refused an interview with RH Reality Check.) Here's his most recent take via the Tribune:
"It's not that I don't believe those numbers. I don't believe the reasoning for those numbers."
Janek's problem: he said the Census Bureau only takes a "snapshot" by asking people if they're uninsured, and doesn't ask them if they had insurance in the past or if they think they have a job lined up with insurance in the future. Janek must not be aware that for nearly 25 years, the Census Bureau's "snapshot" has shown practically the same thing: since 1987, Texas repeatedly has one of the highest, or the very highest, number of uninsured adults in the country. That rate has not been below 1987's 23 percent; it peaked at 26.8 percent in 2009 and is currently estimated at 26.2 percent.
That's a remarkably consistent snapshot of something that Janek seems to believe changes for millions of people by the day. Janek says he isn't sure why Texas "is different" when it comes to health care, but he told the Tribune it could be because the weather here is nice.
"Do we have so many people that are temporarily uninsured? Or is it the general climate of better weather and glorious place to live? Folks come here, and that attracts more folks with health care needs or disabilities?" he wondered during the interview. Surely our high uninsured numbers couldn't be due to the fact that Texas jobs generally don't provide health insurance, that Medicaid in the state is limited, that insurance rates are unregulated or that Texas has a large immigrant population, as the Washington Post reported last year. No, it's probably just the purty weather.
Written by Kirsten Moore for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
Last week's announcement from the esteemed American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), suggesting it's time to make oral contraceptives accessible without a prescription, is the perfect way to re-ignite and re-engage public conversation about making emergency contraception (EC) available without restriction. We cannot afford another decade of political delays when it comes to common sense measures to improve women's health.
Doctors are taking the lead by acknowledging they've become unnecessary obstacles between women and their birth control. That is an example politicians need to follow. Medical science, not political ideology, should govern which products are safe and effective. It is clear women of all reproductive ages will be better off when emergency contraception is easily accessible and in their hands.
One year ago next week the Food and Drug Administration was poised to announce that EC had been approved for on-the-shelf access, such that it could appear at your local pharmacy between condoms and pregnancy test kits. But Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius stepped in at the last minute and ruled that Plan B One-Step and its generic equivalent must remain behind-the-counter. That decision led to confusion and unnecessary obstacles for women, teens, and couples at the very moment clarity was needed most.
Written by Sheila Bapat for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
Many view the 2012 election as a mandate on the Democrats' vision for the poor and middle class. Tammy Baldwin, for example, clearly won her Senate seat because she campaigned on two words: middle class. Elizabeth Warren, elected in Massachusetts, has been one of the most forceful advocates for economic justice. And of course, President Obama's re-election is also validation of his first four years.
Women and non-white voters played a critical role in these victories, but their interests may not be well-served if Democrats do not unite and flex their muscle during the looming "fiscal cliff" negotiations to protect these coalitions. The fiscal cliff is a concocted concept, or at least an exaggerated one, referring to the effective end-date of put in place by the 2011 Budget Control Act. This law requires an end to Bush era tax cuts, Obama's payroll tax cuts, and particularly troubling as the National Women's Law Center points out, extended unemployment benefits, along with sequestration (automatic, across-the-board cuts to a number of federal programs). Negotiations on what these cuts will actually look like are set to begin in earnest this week.
The terms of the Budget Control Act could raise a good amount of revenue, but at what cost? For many of the nation's women and people of color, the possibility of deep cuts to the unemployment provision and other social programs is particularly disturbing. As of October 2012, the unemployment rate is holding steady at 7.9 percent, with 7.2 percent women unemployed, and a staggering 10 percent of Hispanic Americans and 14.3 percent of African Americans unemployed. It's clear that women and people of color have had a tougher time regaining their footing in the economy -- and cuts to the unemployment extension could exacerbate this.
If no agreement is reached, the emergency unemployment compensation program -- costing about $26 billion -- would be automatically cut along with a number of other programs.
Written by Patty Skuster for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
See all our coverage of the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar here.
The news of Savita Halappanavar's tragic death after being denied an abortion has been heard around the world by now. Protesters have gathered in her honor, vigils will continue to be held and, perhaps, the end of her life will be a wake-up call. Women's lives matter and laws should protect them -- not cost them their lives.
In Ireland, abortion is against the law in most cases. But Savita should have received a legal abortion; under the constitution abortion is allowed when a woman's life is in imminent danger. And Savita's husband reports that doctors told them an abortion wasn't an option, despite her repeated requests and severely declining health, because Ireland "is a Catholic country." What that meant for Savita was that the health-care providers at Galway University Hospital made decisions based on their values (as dictated by the Catholic Church) and disregarded the value of her life.
The lack of implementation of the abortion law in Ireland is very similar to so many countries where Ipas works. In most countries, abortion is permitted for one or more reasons. Human rights authorities -- including at the United Nations and ICPD–agree that governments must take steps to make legal abortion available. In fact, in 2010, the European Court on Human Rights ruled that Ireland must implement its abortion law. But when governments don't fulfill their obligations to protect women's reproductive rights, women can't access safe abortion services and die as a result. Just like Savita.
Written by Sheila Bapat for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
A record 98 women will serve in the 113th Congress -- 20 women in the Senate, and 78 in the House. And in this new Congress, the gender chasm between both major parties is even more stark: Of the 20 women set to serve in the U.S. Senate come 2013, 16 are Democrats; of the 78 women in the House, 58 are Democrats. But Democratic women have indicated a desire to collaborate with their female colleagues across the aisle: Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill recently indicated this, as did New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand.
Is cooperation possible with respect to the Paycheck Fairness Act, an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 that was rejected by the Senate this past June? So far, all signs point to a resounding "No." All Democratic women in the Senate supported the Paycheck Fairness Act, while all five Republican women in the Senate rejected it. There is clear evidence that party affiliation, not just gender, are the driving forces behind whether a legislator supports tougher policy to ensure fair pay. The Senate's heavily partisan vote count on the Paycheck Fairness Act when it was under consideration earlier this year reveals this. Chances of passing the law are a bit better since Democrats have increased their lead in the Senate by two votes -- though the law failed by eight votes.
Why did Republican women in the Senate join their party in opposing the Paycheck Fairness Act?
Written by Carole Joffe for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
See all our coverage of the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar here.
The tragic and unnecessary death of Savita Halappanavar -- a 31-year old Indian woman who was denied a life-saving abortion in an Irish hospital -- has sparked reactions across the globe. Thousands have marched in Dublin. Demonstrations have taken place in India and elsewhere. An international day of protest is called for November 21. Tense meetings between Indian and Irish government officials are taking place. The overriding question now is: what will be the legacy of this horrible event, beyond the unspeakable grief of Savita's loved ones? After the demonstrations have stopped, will Irish hospitals -- where abortion remains illegal but is permissible in life-threatening conditions -- proceed differently in the future? Will the country finally move toward legalizing abortion?
This heartbreaking incident has led me to contemplate the long history of abortion struggles around the globe and under what circumstances, change takes place. It is not an exaggeration to say that throughout history millions of women have died and even more have been injured because of the lack of safe abortion. But only some of these tragedies capture the public's attention and become catalysts for change. And sometimes public attitudes are affected even when a woman's death is not involved.
Written by Editor-in-Chief Jodi Jacobson for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
See all our coverage of the tragic case of Savita Halappanavar here.
Last night, we reported on the unnecessary and tragic death of Savita Halappanavar, who entered an Irish hospital undergoing what turned out to be a miscarriage of a wanted pregnancy at 17 weeks, and was denied a life-saving abortion because, as she and her husband were told, Ireland is "a Catholic country." Translation? Even a non-viable fetus, perhaps already dead but in any case absolutely certain not to survive, is more important than a woman's life.
Numerous questions have arisen in the wake of this case.
One: Why did this happen? Doesn't Ireland, a country with otherwise draconian abortion laws, allow abortion to save the life of the mother?
Two: Was there any doubt an abortion was necessary to save Savita's life?
Three: Can this happen in the United States?
I'll take these in turn.
The reason this happened is at once very simple and highly complex. It starts with Irish abortion law, and ends with the imposition of a misogynistic ideology on a woman literally begging for mercy from pain and for her own life as she pleaded with her doctors numerous times to perform an abortion on a fetus it was clear would not live.
Written by Sheila Bapat for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
President Obama's victory is rooted in his narrative on the economy and the middle class -- and so are the victories of other Democratic winners, including Massachusetts Senator-elect Elizabeth Warren. Warren has long been an advocate for working families, but she is best known for promoting greater regulation of the banks and for helping create the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB). Her race, and the grassroots support she garnered, has the same subterranean quality of Obama's 2008 victory: though she outraised all Senate candidates, raking in a monstrous $39 million, the Federal Election Commission's disclosure page tells us that a mere 1.5 percent (about $607,000) of Warren's war chest came from political action committees, most of which are labor or women's rights groups. The vast majority of her support came from tens of thousands of individuals, who all want Warren to give the banks hell.
Warren's victory helps heal America's hangover from 2008-2009, when Lehman Brothers shut its doors and the mortgage crisis reared its head. Even after the financial crisis was under control, Americans saw banks using Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) money to pay executive bonuses while the struggles of the middle class and poor grew. To voters Warren represented the antidote: it was high time to elect someone who will hold the banks to task.
So naturally Warren's victory makes Wall Street nervous.
Written by Editor-in-Chief Jodi Jacobson for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.
See our further analysis of this case.
Last month, a woman was admitted to a hospital in Galway, Ireland. She was 17 weeks pregnant with a wanted child. She was experiencing severe back pain. She was found to be miscarrying the pregnancy.
Within days, she was dead.
Why? Because she ended up in a Catholic hospital, governed by an ethic that even a non-viable fetus doomed to die is more important than a living, breathing 31-year-old woman.
It really is that simple.
IrishTimes.com reports that Savita Halappanavar, a dentist, arrived at the hospital on October 21st. According to the story:
Her husband, Praveen Halappanavar (34), an engineer at Boston Scientific in Galway, says she asked several times over a three-day period that the pregnancy be terminated. He says that, having been told she was miscarrying, and after one day in severe pain, Ms Halappanavar asked for a medical termination.
This was refused, he says, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they were told, "this is a Catholic country."
Indeed.
So, the story continues, "She spent a further 2½ days "in agony" until the foetal heartbeat stopped.
