posted by
mylescorcoran at 02:52pm on 18/07/2008 under health, reproduction, retrocontraception_for_barbara_bush, womens_rights
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Some of you will have already noticed the rotten development afoot in the US Department of Health and Human Services, discussed by (among others) liz_marcs, peaseblossom, and my own sammywol (also here).
Just looking at the text in question I really have to question the sanity (and the ulterior motives) of the drafters of the proposed regulation.
'...the Department proposes to define abortion as “any of the various procedures—including the prescription 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.”'
As per the clear-thinking analysis at Reproductive Health Reality Check, the proposed change in the definition puts the onus on the individual woman to prove she's not pregnant if she wants to obtain oral contraception, say, from any medical or pharmaceutical practitioner who decides that a contraceptive pill is a tool of abortionists.
This is a monstrous act, and one that clearly discriminates against women. Condoms = barrier method = no problem (subtext: condom = for men, allowable). Oral contraceptives = abortion (subtext: deny women control of their own fertility). By the above definition any act that could remotely be construed as likely to lead to a failed implantation (a hot bath, anyone?) is an abortion, and likely an entirely unconscious one. It's discriminatory bollocks and should be confronted as such.
twistedchick, for example, has links to actions US citizens can take. The rest of us should at least post and kick up a fuss.
Just looking at the text in question I really have to question the sanity (and the ulterior motives) of the drafters of the proposed regulation.
'...the Department proposes to define abortion as “any of the various procedures—including the prescription 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.”'
As per the clear-thinking analysis at Reproductive Health Reality Check, the proposed change in the definition puts the onus on the individual woman to prove she's not pregnant if she wants to obtain oral contraception, say, from any medical or pharmaceutical practitioner who decides that a contraceptive pill is a tool of abortionists.
This is a monstrous act, and one that clearly discriminates against women. Condoms = barrier method = no problem (subtext: condom = for men, allowable). Oral contraceptives = abortion (subtext: deny women control of their own fertility). By the above definition any act that could remotely be construed as likely to lead to a failed implantation (a hot bath, anyone?) is an abortion, and likely an entirely unconscious one. It's discriminatory bollocks and should be confronted as such.
twistedchick, for example, has links to actions US citizens can take. The rest of us should at least post and kick up a fuss.
There are 10 comments on this entry. (Reply.)