four (1 votes)
Healthcare Prof:
The following summarizes selected women?s health-related blog entries.
~ ?Health Reform: Where Girls Stand To Gain,? Deborah Kotz, U.S. News & Globe Report?s ?On Women?: Kotz writes that she was ?surprised to see women?s reproductive rights groups use words like ?betrayal,? ?onerous,? and ?unacceptable? in reaction to? the passage with the well being reform law (HR 3590). Although there are restrictions on abortion coverage within the law, ?women stand to benefit greatly from health reform in terms of increased maternity coverage, family planning services and lower insurance premiums,? according to Kotz. Planned Parenthood Federation of America Vice President Laurie Rubiner said, ?This can be a net gain,? adding, ?While we?re a defender of abortion rights, we knew we?d have to do a balancing act, and we felt that the three million low-income women we serve could be better off with this legislation.? Kotz notes that the law will prohibit the practice of charging females more than men for insurance ? known as ?gender rating? ? and denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions. ?This is a particular boon to girls who have been denied for such ridiculous things as having a previous c-section or being a victim of domestic violence,? Kotz writes. Additionally, insurers will be needed to provide maternity care under their plans by 2014, while provisions guaranteeing preventive services for females ?will go into effect in six months,? Kotz says. Ladies who are breastfeeding will be ?entitled to unpaid ?reasonable break times? throughout the day to pump their milk,? Kotz adds (Kotz, ?On Ladies,? U.S. News & Globe Report, 3/23).
~ ?Back Up Your Birth Control Day of Action: Time to Close the Gap on EC Access,? Kelli Conlin, Huffington Post blogs: In conjunction with the annual Back Up Your Birth Control Day of Action, the National Institute for Reproductive Well being is urging FDA to make emergency contraception ?available without a prescription for consumers of all ages so that all girls can back up their birth control if they need to,? Conlin, president of NIRH and NARAL Pro-Choice New York, writes. Currently, EC is available without a prescription to people ages 17 and older, and by prescription for those younger than 17. However, ?[c]onsidering both the high rates of teen pregnancy and the lack of any medical rationale for age restrictions on EC, it just does not make sense to keep these age restrictions in place,? Conlin writes, noting that a U.S. District Court decision in 2009 urged FDA to reconsider the age restrictions. If FDA were to do so, the ?burdensome? requirement of displaying a government-issued ID to purchase EC ?would be removed,? which would help ?close the gap in timely access for EC? to undocumented immigrants, Conlin says. Furthermore, it is ?vital? that states contain coverage for EC in their Medicaid plans ?so that all females can have equal access? towards the medication, which can cost between $35 and $70 at a pharmacy. ?Those who have worked so hard for reform need to not forget that women?s health and reproductive choice, from access to abortion to access to EC, must be incorporated into the spectrum of changes to be demanded,? Conlin says. She concludes that the ?fight will not be over until all wellness care is accessible and affordable for everyone? (Conlin, Huffington Post blogs, 3/24).
~ ?What?s the Real Story on Emergency Contraception?? Amie Newman, RH Reality Check: Newman writes that a recent review of previous emergency contraception studies ?shows that ladies who keep [EC] on hand are just as likely to become pregnant as those girls who did not receive the medication in advance.? However, she notes, the review also found that ?advanced provision of [EC] does not increase? rates of sexually transmitted infections and does not ?negatively impact sexual or reproductive wellness behaviors.? Based on Chelsea Polis with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Well being, ?The study is saying it?s probably not a good idea to hand out packets of EC to girls in advance as a policy if you?re thinking that alone will increase the likelihood of preventing pregnancy,? but the study also is ?definitely not arguing against making access easier.? Pollis added, ?In short, there is no cause not to enable girls to have access to [EC] as a safe and effective pregnancy prevention option.? Newman concludes that the review ?should be a stepping stone to connect the ways in which we want females to use? EC with ?the ways in which ladies may actually be using? it (Newman, RH Reality Check, 3/26).
~ ?Emergency Contraception: One Year Later, Age Restrictions Remain,? Roxann MtJoy, Change.org?s ?Women?s Rights?: One year ago, ?proponents of reproductive justice got to put a notch inside the ?win? column when a federal court ruled that [FDA] was wrong to put limitations on access to emergency contraceptives? and found that FDA had ?acted in bad faith and in response to political pressure? when designing EC policies, MtJoy writes. She continues that 1 year later ?FDA is still dragging its feet in lifting its unreasonable restrictions on? EC. Although EC is available without a prescription to women ages 17 and older, pharmacies are needed to keep the medication behind the counter, even though FDA scientists have said that there is no medical justification for this policy, in accordance with MtJoy. Consequently, people seeking EC ?have to walk up and ask for it ? as opposed to be[ing] able to discreetly pick it up in an aisle like other? nonprescription drugs, MtJoy writes. Customers who wish to purchase EC also must present government-issued identification, prompting MtJoy to ask, ?Why not just make females wear a scarlet ?EC??? MtJoy exhorts readers to tell ?FDA to end unnecessary age restrictions on? EC (MtJoy, ?Women?s Rights,? Change.org, 3/23).
~ ?Stupak Calls Bishops, Antiabortion Groups Hypocrites on HCR,? David Gibson, Politics Daily?s ?Disputations?: ?The war among? antiabortion-rights forces over Democrats? well being reform plans ?is worsening, not easing, inside the wake of the passage with the well being care overhaul,? Gibson writes. He notes that Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) ? the leader of a bloc of antiabortion-rights House Democrats ? called the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and other antiabortion reform opponents ?hypocrites? for not supporting an agreement in which President Obama signed an executive order affirming the bill?s abortion provisions. Stupak noted that USCCB and the National Right to Life Committee supported an executive order then-President George W. Bush signed in 2007 affirming restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, Gibson reports. Stupak said, ?So now President Obama?s going to sign an executive order protecting life and everyone?s condemning it,? adding, ?The hypocrisy is great.? Stupak said he wonders if USCCB and NRLC are ?just using the life issue to try to bring down well being care reform? (Gibson, ?Disputations,? Politics Daily, 3/24).
~ ?Call on Girls To Get the Job Done Right,? Cecile Richards, Huffington Post blogs: Within the wake of well being reform?s passage, ?[t]here is understandable outrage about how abortion was treated in the final bill? (HR 3590), Richards, president with the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, writes. Some observers ?ask why didn?t we yell even louder? or ?overturn the Hyde amendment, which has unfairly prevented poor women from having their health insurance ? Medicaid ? pay for abortion,? she adds. Based on Richards, ?The simple and discouraging truth is that we have an anti-choice House? and ?way too many members of Congress who are opposed to women?s rights and who vote that way every session ? Republicans and Democrats.? However, she adds that the ?women with the House stood like giants? during the abortion debate, especially Democratic Reps. Lois Capps (Calif.), Diana DeGette (Colo.), Rosa DeLauro (Conn.), Jan Schakowsky (Ill.), Nita Lowey (N.Y.) and Louise Slaughter (N.Y.). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was a ?true heroine for women?s health? and ?put herself inside the way of the anti-choice steamroller? and ?[i]n private and in public, ? vowed that there could be no well being care bill if it included? the antiabortion-rights Stupak amendment. Noting that Planned Parenthood will continue to fight the abortion restrictions in the health reform law, Richards concludes that ?we need girls and men elected to office who will stand up for our wellness and our rights, even when it?s hard? (Richards, Huffington Post blogs, 3/24).
~ ?NPR Changes Abortion Language,? David Sweeney, NPR?s ?NPR Ombudsman?: NPR Managing Editor Sweeney writes that following ?a lively debate inside and outside NPR? over the past week about ?how NPR identifies people who support or oppose abortion,? some with the news organization?s ?top editors got together to review the 2005 policy and decided to no longer use ?pro-choice? or ?pro-life?? in its future news reports. Sweeney adds that a memo he distributed to NPR staffers on Thursday states, ?The updated policy is aimed at ensuring the words we speak and write are as clear, consistent and neutral as possible.? The memo adds, ?On the air, we should use ?abortion-rights supporter(s)/advocate(s)? and ?abortion-rights opponent(s)? or derivations thereof (for example: ?advocates of abortion rights?).? Based on the memo, ?It is acceptable to use the phrase ?antiabortion,? but do not use the term ?pro-abortion rights.?? It continues, ?Do not use ?pro-life? and ?pro-choice? in [text-based stories] except when used within the name of a group. Of course, when the terms are used in an actuality they must remain.? He notes, ?An actuality is actually a clip of tape of someone talking. So if a source uses those terms, NPR will not edit them out? (Sweeney, ?NPR Ombudsman,? NPR, 3/24).
~ ?On DNC Thank-You List, Stupak Noticeably Absent,? Sarah Kliff, Newsweek?s ?The Gaggle?: The ?Democratic National Committee is wasting no time thanking vulnerable members of Congress who stuck with the party? by supporting the passage of wellness reform legislation, Kliff writes, adding that the DNC also is ?going right after Republicans who stood in its way.? Starting on Thursday, ?the Dems are showing 35 television and radio ads to call out or congratulate members of Congress who all seem to have one thing in common: a challenging 2010 election in their future,? Kliff reports. ?Noticeably absent from the list? is Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), ?who arguably played the largest role in clinching the House health care-reform vote,? according to Kliff. She adds, ?While this by no means precludes DNC support for Stupak down the road, something about it feels a little off, especially given the fact that the campaign includes a number of other antiabortion [House] Democrats from the Midwest: Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Jim Oberstar (Minn.), Steve Driehaus (Ohio) and Joe Donnelly (Ind.).? In accordance with Kliff, ?Stupak might be the one who could use the DNC?s help the most? because NARAL Pro-Choice America and the Planned Parenthood Federation of America have endorsed Stupak?s Democratic challenger ? abortion-rights supporter Connie Saltonstall. ?Meanwhile, antiabortion groups have largely fled the scene,? Kliff writes, noting that the Michigan chapters of National Right to Life ?withdrew their support for [Stupak] earlier this week? (Kliff, ?The Gaggle,? Newsweek, 3/25).
Reprinted with type permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You are able to view the entire Daily Women?s Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Everyday Women?s Well being Policy Report is actually a totally free service with the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.
? 2010 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.
Source: http://hymall.com.cn/blogs-comment-on-health-reform-law-access-to-emergency-contraception/
federal possum kingdom lake marlene dietrich free typing games free typing games jack the ripper mel gibson
No comments:
Post a Comment