Reducing Access to Contraception

To all of you who are interested in having sex without being obliged to get pregnant,

Please be advised of the growing movement to reframe contraception as abortion, and reduce women's access to it. The current medical definition of pregnancy has it starting at the time of implantation. The religious right defines it from conception/fertilization.  Because contraceptives like the pill can, in theory, prevent implantation, these are viewed by the hard right as abortifacients. Medically, they are not (also the primary mechanism of action is to prevent ovulation). Therefore, emergency contraception (the so-called Plan B) and regular birth control pills can potentially fall under the conscience clause that the HHS wants to enact, saying that a provider, be it physician, pharmacist, surgical scrub tech, whatever, can refuse to participate in any procedure/prescription that is felt to be morally objectionable without their jobs being at risk, provided their employers with to continue recieving federal funds. I think one of the other members here can provide you a link to the public comments section regarding this HHS dictum.

Likewise the hard right would like to reduce access to all contraception, due to the religious philosophy that sex is solely for the purpose of procreation (although they endorse natural family planning- the ol rhythm method- so that seems a touch hypocritical) and that recreational sex is not to be tolerated.

For those of you whose religious leanings are not so, um, strict, and for those of you who aren't Christian, please keep an eye on the news pertaining to these people lest their views insidiously sneak into our law. NOTHING in my personal belief system precludes recreational sex, and I don't give a rat's A$$ what someone else's god has to say about it. Separation of Church and State!

I would also like to remind all of us that without reproductive freedom, we will NEVER achieve meaningful equality as women. In a world where men can have sex with relative impunity and all the burden/consequence lies on the woman, we will never move forward. It's our ability to defer childbearing that lets us go to college and start jobs. It's our ability to regulate our number of offspring that keeps us out of poverty (or, in less poverty anyway given the current economic system).

The anti-contraception movement seems to be getting a little more prominent, and they scare the living daylights out of me. You'd better believe that if McCain/Palin win, I'm getting my IUD pronto, 'cause I can guarantee those will be reframed as abortifacients and sharply regulated.

Just a heads' up.  I've noticed more and more of this and it's creeping me out.

Noelle,

Your comments are extremely well framed.  This scares the daylights out of me, too.  It's a constant battle, and if we don't get proactive we'll wake up one morning and find ourselves in 1980's Romania.  For my part, I am actively campaigning for local, state and federal candidates who are prochoice.

I'm with you 100%.

I am not a sex-fiend; in fact, I'm a virgin. BUT, I believe that people have the right to have sex without being obligated to risk having a child. Not only for the sake of the people having sex, but for everyone around us. I'm sorry to say, but if contraceptives actually do become outlawed or whatever, our population is going to multiply because sex, for some people, is apart of their normal lives.

Now I'm scared too. I plan to adopt when I get older, so... It's possible I will die a virgin? :[

What about condoms?  Do they condone the spread of STDs too?  (Actually, seeing as how they believe in Abstinence Only sex education programmes, the answer is probably yes.)  Sad, sad world.

Ah, but you see, if everyone only has one sex partner, ever, there will be no spread of STDs (logically, there's something to that, it's just never actually going to happen). I suspect that the thinking is along the lines of "only dirty sluts get STDs. Sigh.

Not really anything to do with me as it will never be a problem over here (UK) but what I read is quite scandalous, and I'm in full agreement with you ladies.

 

And so the re-introduction of back street abortions, women dying in child birth because the have hidden the pregnancy, unwanted kids being left in parks the list goes on. These people really need to see the big picture.

Original Post by andie-joe:

Not really anything to do with me as it will never be a problem over here (UK) but what I read is quite scandalous, and I'm in full agreement with you ladies.

 

And so the re-introduction of back street abortions, women dying in child birth because the have hidden the pregnancy, unwanted kids being left in parks the list goes on. These people really need to see the big picture.

 Only in America.... and third world countries.

Thing is, there are a lot, a lot a LOT of conservatives here, the problem is they don't HAVE a big picture. Religious zealots pick and chose WHAT they want to believe in a religion, and to hell with the rest of it.

I've noticed with a lot of these 'new bill' ideas, the thinking is painfully black and white, and predominately male in thinking.

America is still an infantile country, But what do you expect with a country founded by people who where kicked out of England for being too prudish?

Utterly ridiculous attitude about sex in the states. Personally I can't believe the lack of serious sex education in school, the high cost of birth control pills, and yes, that certain element in society that thinks they should decide things for the rest of us.

#6,  America has many good things too, but I definitely don't agree with this bill.

The reason it wouldn't be a problem in the UK is because we have an outrageous amount of teenage pregnancies. Hence why abortions are given free here and the numbers of them are so high.

With the contraception (which is also free)thing, our government realises that they will not stop people having sex so their view is that provention is a better option to the cure ie abortion.

 

Could someone give me some links that talk about "the growing movement to reframe contraception as abortion."  It gets talked about every election year but no one has done anything about it.

I don't think anyone will do anything about it.  Politicans know what would happen if abortions were banned.  They're just playing the game.  Roe v. Wade won't be overturned.  I doubt the people would let that happen.

Utterly ridiculous attitude about sex in the states

Agreed, but I think perhaps for different reasons. I was raised that the best birth control that is 100% effective is abstinence. If you don't have sex, you don't get pregnant.

Having said that, birth control is a great thing- can you imagine what life without it would be like? A whole lot (more) unwanted pregnancies and in the case of a married couple, families the size of my mothers (she had 12 brothers and sisters, the only time her mom got a break was when her dad was working in the woods for the winter months).

that certain element in society that thinks they should decide things for the rest of us

That has always been and always will be part of life though. An easy example; everytime you get in your car, you're following laws, rules, restrictions that someone else has made (seatbelts, speed limits, license, car registration, etc). Like pregnancies and STD's, you might get lucky a few times by taking your chances, but the consequences can be unpleasant. In the car analogy, a fine, arrest, accident.

My concern would be, there needs to be a line drawn somewhere. Who decides where that line is? The individual or the government? Do we really have more freedom by being allowed to do whatever we deem right for us? As a parent, I don't let my children do whatever they want in order to preserve their right to express their individuality. I set boundaries because I love them and want them to be safe.

NOT that I'm saying the government loves us and is always looking out for what's best for us...

am I just digging my hole deeper?...   :D

Jewels, here is the original wording from the HHS conscience clause.  I think it pretty clearly lets people redefine contraception as abortion. It has since been changed to be more ambiguous:

"HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt has issued a final version of his proposed regulation to protect medical conscience (PDF). As predicted, he has dropped the sentence that originally defined abortion as "any of the various procedures—including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action—that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation."

-Swiped from slate magazine

When the 2 really old liberal justices on the supreme court die or retire, and they are replaced by conservatives, I can virtually guarantee Roe v Wade will be overturned- remember, that wouldn't actually outlaw abortion, it would return it to a matter of states' rights. Quite a few states restrict abortion so much already that it's virtually unobtainable (see south dakota), so I think it's a reasonable inference that in many states, abortion would be illegal except in life threatening circumstances. Now, rich people can always travel to a more liberal state, but poor people can't, further exacerbating the gap between the rich and poor since the unplanned preg rate is higher in the lower SES groups anyway. Keeping them barefoot and pregnant virtually guarantees no upward mobility- you think maybe that's how the current powers that be like it?

So, in summary, I'm pretty sure I"m not being hysterical or imagining things. :)

Never gonna happen.

Okay, so Bush says organizations can't discriminate against people who are anti-birth control.  Even if that organization is a local health clinic that gives out free condoms and birth control pills or hospitals that hand out Plan B pills.  People can't be forced to do something they deem immoral.  They can't be threatened with being fired or anything of the like.

Is that about the jist of it?  

Your concern is the new definition of abortion, right?  I agree it's ludicrous, but I can't make the leap that they want to ban (or make it hard to recieve) all forms of birth control.  The government knows they don't belong in my uterus and if they try to force their way in, heaven help them.

Personally, I think that the government trying to control something that each women should be able to choose for herself is ridiculous. although many individuals are against abortion, that is their own choice to make and not the governments, and not only abortion but also any other form of birth control. individuals choosing to abstain are making a contious choice- those who do not choose to abstain should also be able to make that choice. the government should not be involved in anything more than getting our youth educated and making sure that the drugs available to us are safe. i understand that everyone has their own beliefs, however people are not going to stop having sex. as seen in an earlier post by the individual in the UK.. they have figured out that sex is a natural part of life and that it is going to happen and due to that they have made preventative measures more accessible. that being said, we as women should be able to make our own decisions about what methods of birth control to use to prevent pregnancy. we should not be 1. deprived having a successful life without children and 2. for having sex.  

 

In regards to the elections.. i think that it is ridiculous that Palin says that it was her daughters choice to keep the child and her own party wants to take that choice away from other young women in the same situation.... so hypocritical!!

Also rediculous is the outstanding prices we pay for good birthcontrol methods... personally i have a very good insurance plan and am still paying about $30 for my birth control pills. this gets a little old being a college student! But hey at least i have the option of taking the pill....

This makes me SICK. I myself am an Atheist and I firmly believe that there is no God, so taking away MY rights to have safe and protected sex as I please because someone's stupid religion (in my opinion) says it's not right or moral (what a joke!) makes me hate what this country is becoming. Thank you so much for this post! UGH!

This will never happen.  Even if McCain and Palin get elected, congress would never pass this.  People always forget that a 2/3 vote in Congress is the only way to pass a bill and right now the majority of Congress are Democratic. 

I already heard about this disgusting crap and wrote my senator about it (of course she's pro-choice...)

The foundations of Roe v. Wade have been systematically chipped away, much like Plessy v. Ferguson got chipped away at to enable Brown v. Board. You don't need Congress on your side, Christine07085, just another Justice. Given the opportunity, Roe'll get overturned faster than you can say stare decisis.

And here's the thing about birth control - of any sort - it being readily avaliable to anyone who wants it is the abberation, not the norm, and has not been the case for much of U.S. history. It really wouldn't take that much to slide back. Now, I don't know if that would happen, but we're closer to the ledge than you might think.

You know I'm of the philosophy if you are anti-abortion don't have one!!!

 

I once dated a guy who was from Iran and had to laugh at him when he said that there were no STD's in Iran- like all those men and women are so pure- saved themselves for marriage never cheated yada yada yada -- yea they just killed the women who happened to get caught adulterating, whereas the man probably threw the first stone!

These high and mighty folks who call themselves Christians are a lot of the people spreading their diseases and "seeds"  Heck look at the priests I guess since they cofessed their sins to another priest they are obsolved?? 

I have a daughter who was sexually assaulted and our insurance wouldn't cover the "plan B"  pills.  Those weren't cheap either.  We did file an appeal and got them covered but still if we hadn't happened to have that extra $ at the time and if a pregnancy did occur was she expected to carry that constant reminder of her trauma for 9 months and if she decided to give the child up for adoption worry about the reminder coming after her in 18 years - or to raise it?? 

Personally I sometimes wish the US would do what China does -- limit the number of chldren we can have.  Maybe 2-3 but I am really tired of paying for some women's 4th or 5th child thru Medicaid because she doesn't know how to keep her legs closed or use birth control. 

I used to do billing for an OB and his office manager told me a story of one women who was in the office pregnant with her 5th child all paid for by courtesy of Medicaid - all fathered by different men and she was talking to a women in the waiting room who was a friend and the friend asked if that was her last pregnancy and the boyfriend says "oh no she's gotta have one of mine too"  This is not responsible parenthood!