Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Red State Round-Up: Virginia

Written by Katie O'Connell, intern at a pro-choice organization in Virginia and contributing blogger, Shout Out! JMU

Up until last year I had never heard of a Crisis Pregnancy Center (CPC), which is funny, considering that there are 52 operating in Virginia, 38 of which receive state funding from ‘Choose Life’ license plates. In contrast, there are only 21 offices providing abortion services to the women of Virginia, 17 of which could be shut down if anti-choice zealots pursue targeted regulations through the state Board of Health. CPCs, for those who don’t know what they are, are unlicensed anti-choice, pro-abstinence facilities posing as medical clinics which exist solely to dissuade women from choosing abortion. In order to do so, they engage in misinformation and manipulation of women who may find themselves in a confusing and emotional situation. Frequently, it seems the pregnant woman’s ability to make her own informed choice is of little consequence, and they will do whatever they can to convince her to carry the pregnancy to term. Often CPCs list their services under “abortion” in the Yellow Pages so that women seeking abortions will end up going to them instead of a comprehensive women’s health clinic. Many of them advertise “post-abortion trauma syndrome” in their literature, saying that women may feel guilty or suicidal after having an abortion. One pamphlet used by CPCs entitled, “The Condom: Do Condoms Make Sex Safer?” states that “to date, there is no evidence that consistent use of condoms during oral sex reduces your chance of getting most STIs, including HIV” (Life Cycle Books). Much of what they do is steeped in a right-wing Christian agenda that strips women of reproductive choice and bodily autonomy.

I wanted to find out more about CPCs myself, from firsthand experience, so a friend and I decided to pose as a couple facing a possible unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. Since we attend James Madison University in Harrisonburg, we visited the local CPC (tagline: You Have More Choices than You Think), which was surreal—I was nervous that I’d slip up or seem suspicious, and I had no idea what to expect. I was assured during my training that my nervousness was actually a good thing, since any pregnant woman entering the clinic would probably be more freaked out than I was. Calligraphic bible verses and framed words like “peace” were the main decorative motif. Religious paraphernalia aside, the facility looked like a typical doctor’s office—reception window up front, pale green walls, and light-colored wicker furniture. Pictures of landscapes and flowers adorned the walls of the hallway. I had already been briefed on how things were going to go, since most CPCs follow the same basic formula: check in, pregnancy test, “options counseling,” and then results. After checking in I was required to fill out a form asking medical information, along with several probing questions about my views on abortion. For one such multiple choice question, the leading answers were “a) I think abortion is morally wrong, b) I’m not sure, and c) abortion is okay…” My male friend who had accompanied me to pose as my boyfriend was also required to fill out a form, since they had offered to counsel him as well. After a few minutes in the admittedly calming waiting room, their (licensed) nurse took me to the bathroom where I was instructed to pee in a cup, leave the urine sample on the bathroom counter, and then go into the room where I would be counseled.

The woman who counseled me came in a few minutes after I did and talked in a quiet soothing voice the entire time. Possibly the most infuriating thing about the visit was that she didn’t seem to actually know much about what I was asking her. Not only was she providing me with inaccurate medical information, she was mostly just reading it to me from various pamphlets and offering up vague anecdotes about women she had met. Additionally, the pamphlets did not provide much clearer information. “Before You Decide” contains what has become my favorite statistic of all time: “Use of the abortion pill has resulted in the death of a number of women due to sepsis.” I can’t believe that they would tout something so vague as a believable statistic—two is a number, but so is 200. Clearly the literature is meant only to scare women who seek abortion, as opposed to providing accurate medical information. As soon as she sat down the nurse fumbled with a “pregnancy wheel” in order to determine how far along I was (despite the fact that we didn’t even have the results of the test yet), and initially came to the conclusion, judging from my last period, that I was 10 weeks along before recanting and saying I was only seven weeks along. I asked her about the abortion pill (RU-486), and she told me that I was too far along to take it (I wasn’t – see heading What Is the Abortion Pill), and then pulled out another pamphlet, specific to RU-486. Opening the booklet to a picture of a forlorn looking blonde, she looked at me and said, “See? She looks sad… I think she really regrets her decision now.” The CPC places a heavy emphasis on the horrors of “post-abortion trauma syndrome,” which is evident in their campus advertising (“Had an abortion? Feeling scared? Nervous? Guilty? Suicidal?”), and their in-clinic talking points. She informed me that some women can have an abortion and seem totally fine, but 10 years down the road they’ll end up fraught with guilt and inner turmoil. She also said that women in her generation who had had abortions ended up with infertility later in life.

Eventually, the nurse came in to give me my results and answer any other medical questions I had. When I asked her about abortion side effects, she explained to me that most women hemorrhage after having abortions, that infertility and breast cancer are common side effects, and that the uterus is frequently perforated—all blatantly false statements. Later I asked whether or not they provide contraceptives, and I was handed a pamphlet about the inadequacies of condoms, and another pamphlet declaring that “the only safe sex is no sex until faithful married sex.” Abstinence only until marriage is a core value at CPCs, and after my negative pregnancy test result came back, my counselor said, “Now that you’re feeling so good about this result, why don’t we bring your boyfriend in to have a little discussion about your relationship?” She spent another 25 to 30 minutes with my friend and me pressuring us to promise abstinence, even telling us that having sex before marriage with someone other than your eventual spouse is akin to infidelity. At the end of this counseling session, my counselor informed me that she actually teaches a family life class at my university, which was not particularly reassuring about the unbiased quality of the education that myself and other students receive.

After my visit I flipped through all the literature that my friend and I had been given. The emotionally manipulative techniques are still unfathomable to me—I can’t believe that anyone would lie about someone else’s reproductive health just to push along their own political agenda. Not to mention, the paternalistic and misogynistic literature my male friend received was unbelievable. One pamphlet has an entire section on the apparent “Double Standard” of abortion—that when men push women to have abortions it’s seen as coercive and abusive, but when women choose abortion it’s an expression of freedom. Sorry to shake up your whole worldview, Life Cycle Books, but abortion is not about men, and not about the “Forgotten Fathers of Abortion.” It’s about women making very real medical decisions about their own body, and the fact that they should be able to do so without fearing stigmatization and shame from society. After this experience I began working with NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia on a campaign called “Support without Shame” because women need to have bodily autonomy and make crucial decisions for themselves. The Support without Shame campaign is not attempting to shut down CPCs. We just believe that all women facing unintended pregnancies deserve respect, freedom from shame and guilt, and access to unbiased medically accurate and science based information regarding ALL options. Women should be trusted with their own bodies. It’s not as if there are laws on the books constantly governing what men do with their bodies. At the CPC, I was stressed and upset as someone who wasn’t pregnant, and who was actually expecting to be manipulated and lied to. I can’t imagine what this would be like for an unsuspecting and vulnerable pregnant woman who believes what she is being told by people who can barely keep their own information straight.

Monday, September 13, 2010

Stopping Anti-Choice Terrorism: Where Do We Go From Here?

Written by Steph Herold, Social Media Strategist for Trust Women PAC

Last week, anti-choice zealot and violence enthusiast Justin Carl Moose was arrested in North Carolina for providing information to create explosives designed to blow up an abortion clinic. Thankfully, he was caught before any harm was done to the clinic, staff, and patients, but if it wasn’t for Facebook, he might have gone unnoticed.

A week or two ago, I received what I thought was an innocent instant message: a friend asking for quick advice. Thinking it was going to be about roommate drama or boy issues, I said yes and expected to get back to my own work in a few minutes. What I didn’t anticipate was that my friend, who works at a prominent pro-choice organization, was dealing with an anti-choice zealot on Facebook, a possible terrorist, and was looking to me to help her decide the right course of action to take.

I took a look at the offenders’ Facebook profile, on which he had listed such aphorisms as “end abortion by any means necessary and at any cost” and “save a life, shoot an abortionist.” Seeing these shockingly violent aspirations stated so bluntly with such pride gave me chills. My friend shared that he wrote threatening messages on the Facebook page of her place of employment, which is what led her to his profile in the first place.

After skimming through all of the hateful messages on Moose’s profile, I told my friend to contact the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, her local police, and the police in his area. I also suggested she contact the National Abortion Federation and any clinics local to this guy to put them on alert. It turns out that all of these authorities knew about him already and were vigilantly monitoring his activities. While writing violent threats on a pro-choice organization’s Facebook wall isn’t enough to launch a police investigation, it did put them on high alert, which lead to his eventual arrest.

No matter the venue, anti-choice terrorism or threats of violence cannot be ignored. Besides reporting it to the proper authorities, there are a number of other things you can do:

  • Educate your peers about anti-choice violence. Let your friends and family know that abortion providers are in literal danger and that the right for women to make reproductive choices is constantly under siege. The more people that know about it, the more action we can take to prevent it.
  • If you feel safe doing so, write a letter to the editor of your local paper supporting your local abortion provider. Public support is important, especially when abortion is such a stigmatized subject.
  • Become a clinic escort at your local clinic. This allows you to make sure patients and staff get into the clinic despite harassing protesters. This also lets you know exactly what the anti-choice people in your area look like and what activities they participate in, which is useful information should you have to report anything to the police.
  • Write to your elected officials at the local, county and state levels and explain why you support your local abortion providers. Make sure you let policy makers know that you want them to do whatever they can to protect providers in your area.
What are your ideas for stopping anti-choice terrorism?

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Red State Round-Up: Arizona

Written by pro-choice activist Amanda Webster

On July 29th 2010, Arizona law SB 1304/HB 2649, an expanded abortion reporting bill, went into effect. Observing that our current governor, Jan Brewer is "pro life", as well as the majority of our state's House and Senate, another anti abortion bill passing comes at no major shock to residents of the Grand Canyon State. Certainly it's not the worst of our anti choice legislation considering our mandatory wait period, insurance prohibition, targeted regulation of abortion providers, and teenage consent law.

What do you need to know about a woman who has had an abortion? Does it matter how old she is, her marital status, how much she has in her bank account, or where she works? Are we less judgmental when a woman can "justify" her choice to terminate a pregnancy? Or does the anti choice movement want to strip women of their privacy and place one more roadblock between her and her right to a safe and legal elective abortion? The group Arizona Right to Life brags on their website that "the information [gathered from this bill] gives policymakers and pro-life advocates more statistical information on abortions performed in the state, and the information is also used by crisis pregnancy centers to better serve the needs of women." The movement is sly in their tactics, we can't argue that. Coming from someone who has been a victim of the deception of a "crisis pregnancy center", I can assure you that the information gathered will be used for nothing more than a more educated angle at trying to manipulate women out of their decision to terminate. While I fully support offering resources to women who feel coerced into an abortion, I certainly do not think that giving her false hopes and inaccurate information is going to accomplish that. All it is doing is postponing her decision, but unfortunately sometimes that's all they need to prevent her from obtaining her procedure.

The problem isn't the concept of mandatory reporting, as some statistics can prove beneficial to providing medical research and protecting the health of women. The dilemma with this specific bill is that the recordkeeping required does not respect the patient's confidentiality and right to privacy. For example, reason for abortion data is already required on reports, but the bill language leaves a loophole to include requiring a woman to provide her reason for choosing an elective abortion. Currently, abortion providers are required to report particular information to the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS.) This bill expands already existing requirements. It now includes things like seven new court reporting requirements regarding judicial bypass for minors and information from health care professionals about complications that may arise from the procedure. ADHS is already having issues reporting accurate numbers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the state, and there is no evidence that requiring additional information will improve reporting outcomes. Despite the fact that individually identifiable references are removed from the final analysis that is available to the public, this law still creates an additional unneccesary burden for the woman, demanding personal information during an already emotional time. Information that is not going to prove beneficial to anyone but those opposed to her right to be there in the first place.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

A Letter by the Remarkable Dr. Bill Harrison

This is a letter written by Dr. Bill Harrison of the Fayetteville Women's Clinic. We were so moved by it that we wanted to reprint it here.

Jan 22, 2000


A Letter to Medical Students for Choice,

I write this now because I grow older and recently have been granted
a glimpse of my mortality. Like you, I don't know when or where I
will die, but I suspect that I run a little greater risk of meeting a
violent death than most Americans, for I have dared to ride the tiger.

This tiger is ignorance, intolerance and hatred incarnated in some of
the anti-abortion Religious Right which now almost totally controls
the Republican Party and the political right wing in this country.
And I have chosen to ride this tiger unquietly, raking its sides with
verbal spurs, swinging my hat and whooping like a cowboy for the past
15 years. Does riding this tiger in this way rather than silently
going about my business - and avoiding at least as much as I can
attracting its attention - mean that I love my family less than those
Pro-Choice physicians, especially Ob/Gyns, who silence the voices of
their consciences and creep away from the controversy for fear of
social, economic or personal consequences if they do what they know
to be right?

Though many might disagree, I don't think so. I believe that after
loving and supporting the mother of his children, that the greatest
gift a father can give his family, or a brother might give his
siblings and their children, or a child his parents, a citizen his
country, or we frail human beings the world, is to act rightly and
openly to do justice as we are given to know what is right and just.

The greater the cost and risk of doing this, the greater is the
necessity one should so do. In our democracy, when those who know
that they should advocate, advance and act on a particularly humane
and rational public policy, such as Roe v. Wade, remain silent and
still from fear of shrill and hate-filled voices, from fear of the
very real slings and arrows, bullets and bombs of some whom they
might offend - giving way to those who would dictate bad public
policy based on narrow sectarian beliefs or fraudulent propaganda
with no regard for the terrible consequences which face millions of
people every year - then our free society threatens to degenerate
into a totalitarian theocracy or a dictatorship. And dignity and
freedom will be inexorably crushed.

When we dedicate our lives to worthy causes, causes greater than our
own petty dreams and fears, we play the same role as have those who
have gone before us and pledged or given their lives, their fortunes
and their sacred honor in the quest for freedom and dignity. Most who
advance the cause of human dignity and freedom are not called to give
their all in the noise and strife of the battlefield or at the scene
of some great disaster.

But all of us are auditioned and everyone of us constantly tested in
other theatres in this human drama, in arenas which mandate a
different kind of courage. Most of these roles don't require the
sudden adrenalin-propelled acts of nearly superhuman bravery
displayed in war and disasters, but call for a more mundane day-in,
day-out effort to stand up to our own fear and to unrelenting public
criticism, sometimes to threats of violence, often with little or no
obvious support. (Though, sooner or later, support will come if one
is right.)

Quite by chance, I found my place in the age-old conflict between
reason and unreason, freedom and bondage, dignity and indignity -
between good and evil, if you will - while practicing my specialty,
Ob/Gyn, and providing safe, affordable abortion as just one aspect of
my professional duties. I hope that each of you and your medical
school classmates may find in your lives a part so fit, a cause so
worthy.

William F. Harrison M.D.

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Celebrating the 19th Amendment: The Struggles of our Grandmothers, the Rights of Our Daughters

Written by Julie Burkhart, Executive Director of Trust Women PAC
Originally posted on RHRealityCheck.org

This month marks the 90th Anniversary of the 19th Amendment, which, after decades of long battles, gave women the right to vote in the United States. When you think about it, 90 years is a relatively short period of time – especially when you ponder things such as the age of the earth, human evolution or the wondrous redwood trees in the Western United States. However, when you’re engaged in the middle of a struggle, as many of us know, even a day can feel like a lifetime. Oppression slows the hands of time, as the oppressed are not fully able to realize the full potential of their lives.

Even within our own families, we have relatives whose lives have intersected with our own and who were well into adulthood before they had the right to vote. My great grandmother, Lillie, born in 1886, was 34 years old before she was able to benefit from the suffragist movement. She died when she was 101 years old so I benefited from a couple of decades spent with her.

I am now a mother to a nine-year-old daughter, Olivia - the apple of my eye. Even though she never met her great- great-grandmother, I work to instill what Lillie taught me as a child. I can remember having long conversations with her in the kitchen as she carefully dissected her daily grapefruit or as she baked a perfectly delicious angel food cake. These moments in time I seek to pass down to my daughter, so that she can also know what was important to Lillie.

When I look into her eyes, it breaks my heart that there are people in the world who do not believe, solely due to the sex of my child, that she’s not capable of full autonomy and rights. When I witness her natural curiosity, hunger for knowledge and unconditional embracement of the world, I know that it is only the oppressive structures and confines of our world that dampens the potential of women and girls.

Being a feminist mom, I try to lead by example and engage my daughter in a variety of discussions. Such discussions might involve talking about the meaning of feminism, what it’s like to be a teenager, how babies are made and born and the meaning of abortion. I always try to lay out the facts, without judgment, so she can then base her conclusions about such things on her own thoughts and feelings. It just so happened that we were driving home one day when I said something about purchasing “back-to-school” clothes and shoes. I’m not even sure what I said, but it set my daughter off on a lengthy diatribe about her body and the rights that she has to make decisions regarding all aspects of her body. It was crystal clear - my daughter had been listening to and absorbing everything I had been saying along the way.

When I was leading the pro-choice community response to the Summer of Mercy Renewal in 2001, when anti-choice groups descended upon Wichita, Kansas, to “finish the job” left unfinished from 1991’s Summer of Mercy, I encountered a situation that still haunts me. One hot summer day, I was standing across the street from Women’s Health Care Services, which was owned and operated by Dr. George Tiller, monitoring the crowds and looking for anything that may appear out of the ordinary. A verbal altercation broke out between anti-choice protestors and pro-choice supporters when an anti-choice man with a very young daughter turned to me and declared that he was proudly raising his daughter to be subservient to her future husband and to follow his rules.

This was absolutely heartbreaking to me. I looked into the brown eyes of that little girl with the dark wavy hair and saw nothing but wonder and curiosity about the world, but knew that some of her hopes and dreams may be dashed because of the strict gender roles that her father adheres to for women and men.

When I think about my daughter and that little girl, I think they deserve to have all the opportunities in the world available to them. They need not be limited by doctrine, or dogma, or fear. These little girls, who will one day be women, are feeling, thinking human beings who deserve to experience life to the fullest. Nothing less is acceptable for them.

Every day, I’m grateful to all the women who fought so tenaciously for universal suffrage; we are the beneficiaries of their vision for a better world. I’m grateful to my great grandmother for helping me understand civic responsibility and the tenuousness of our rights if we do not remain diligent. Without our foremothers, we would not have gained the rights we enjoy today. In these times, women and men go to the polls regularly to vote for candidates from president to city council. It’s almost an afterthought. Women are no longer expected to vote as their husbands or fathers or brothers vote; women vote the way in which they see fit.

I long for the day when all rights are fully realized for women; when women and girls can be freely educated, when women are paid a salary equal to men, when women have universal access to birth control and when women can make decisions about their pregnancies without interference. I thank Lillie for helping me understand the importance and I thank Olivia for her innocent approach to the world and being able to see its limitless possibilities.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Red State Round-Up: Kansas

Written by Diane Wahto of Wichita, Kansas

Kansas liberals have their work cut out for them after a legislative session in which Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson vetoed bills that tightened abortion restrictions, denied federal family planning money intended for Planned Parenthood, and funneled money intended for Public Broadcasting to the Kansas Commission on Veterans Affairs. Additionally, conservatives have mounted a campaign to remove Kansas Supreme Court Justice Carol Bier from office and to change the way judges are selected.

These events take place against the backdrop of Dr. George Tiller’s murder a little more than a year ago and the pending prosecution by the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts of Dr. Ann Kris Neuhaus, the doctor who signed off on the documents allowing the late-term abortions that Dr. Tiller performed for women around the world.

The last several years, Kansans have become accustomed to having moderate Democratic and Republican governors, including Republicans Bill Graves, Mike Hayden, and Democrats John Carlin, Kathleen Sebelius, and Mark Parkinson. Parkinson, formerly a Republican, changed parties in order to run for lt. governor with Sebelius because he saw the Republican Party moving too far to the right. He ranks high in the polls and probably could win a second full term if he chose to run again. However, both he and Troy Findley, his lt. governor, announced that they would not run for governor at the end of their terms.

That leaves us with a choice between unknown Democratic candidate and staunch pro-choice supporter Tom Holland and Republican Senator Sam Brownback, who is an avowed enemy of Roe v. Wade, Public Broadcasting, Planned Parenthood, and taxes. He also believes the problems with Social Security have come about because women have abortion rights, thus leaving unborn the tax-paying workers who would be contributing to Social Security. His Senate voting record shows he has consistently voted against the interests of Kansans. Despite that, right now the polls show Brownback ahead by a large margin over Holland.

When Parkinson vetoed SB 218, the bill restricting late-term abortions, the Senate override attempt failed, but the House attempt passed by one vote. The bill came back up for an override vote and this time the override failed by two votes. One vote change came about after intense e-mail, phone, and Facebook lobbying efforts of one representative. This bill would have ended the so-called partial birth abortion 'mental health' exceptions and stipulate precise reporting of late-term abortions.

If Brownback does succeed in his run for governor, there will be no defense against anti-choice attempts to toughen late-term abortion restrictions in the state. Right now, no Kansas provider performs late-term abortions, but the anti-choice faction is trying to guard against having Dr. Leroy Carhart, an associate of Dr. Tiller’s, move to Kansas from Nebraska.

Another Tiller associate, Dr. Ann Kris Neuhaus, faces an 11-count disciplinary complaint relating to the second opinion documents she signed for Dr. Tiller. The complaint alleges she failed to properly evaluate whether the abortion was necessary to save the life or the health of the woman, as required by Kansas state law, a charge she denies. Dr. Tiller, acquitted of misdemeanor charges in a court of law in April 2009 , faced the same charges. They were dropped when he was killed. The charges are questionable, given that the petition was made public by Operation Rescue, which had filed the initial charges against both doctors. An evidentiary hearing is set for Jan. 11, 2011.

In the meantime, the Kansas political scene, coming off a heated, mudslinging primary among Republicans, will roll on to the November election. With Brownback having the edge in name recognition, pro-choice voters can only hope that Holland can make himself known and let voters know how reactionary Brownback is. After all, he’s the senator who stood on the floor of the Senate in front of a hand-drawn picture of embryos, labeled in childish scrawl, “We love you.”

If Kansans for Life succeed in their push to remove Justice Bier and conservatives prevail in their move to change the method of appointing Kansas Supreme Court justices, Kansas will face a perfect storm of Red State rollback. Currently, state Supreme Court justices are picked by a nine-member nominating commission; four of those commissioners are non-lawyers appointed by the governor. The other five, including the chair, are elected by lawyers. The proposed change touted by conservatives would allow the governor to send nominees’ names to the legislature for approval. Rather than take politics out of the mix, as conservatives claim, this process would politicize the process beyond repair.

Fortunately, many Kansans are stepping up to make sure their state stays semi-purple. Democrats at their state meeting on Aug. 14, were energized and ready to go to work for their well-qualified candidates. Kansas NOW and Wichita NOW have energetic people working for women’s reproductive rights. A new group, The Group, has started a grass roots movement to get moderate Republican women as well as Democratic women involved in the political process. Even though she didn’t win the primary, pro-choice Republican Jean Shodorf moved ahead of a well-funded anti-choice opponent, thanks in part to the efforts of The Group. Kansans don’t plan to throw in the towel just yet.