"Why would a woman seek an abortion from Dr. Kermit Gosnell?" - a Philadelphia abortion provider who has been accused of murders by the district attorney. Susan Schewel, executive director of the Women's Medical Fund, a high-quality, respected abortion provider in Philadelphia, answers that question with facts that we must not ignore, no matter how monstrous Gosnell may be (if convicted). The case of Gosnell quite simply illuminates the tremendous injustice that will be done if legislative attempts succeed to ban insurance coverage of abortion under health care reform.
Whatever you think about abortion, please read this.
Schewel writes:
Abortion is a legal, common and routine medical procedure. Yet for 25 years, Pennsylvania has banned Medicaid funding for abortion. Abortion is the only routine medical procedure not covered by Medicaid, and this prohibition leaves desperate women vulnerable to substandard providers such as Gosnell.
She reviewed records of women who lived in the neighborhood where Gosnell practiced and who went to him before going to her excellent practice. During January and February 2010, she found six women, ages 21 to 36.
Five were mothers. Four were enrolled in Medicaid; two had no health insurance at all. Two received unemployment checks, and one had just been laid off a few days before she called. One worked at McDonald's and earned $450 a month, $200 of which went to rent.
One was obtaining a protection-from-abuse order against her violent husband. Another was pregnant due to a rape. One was living in a homeless shelter with her young child. She received $316 a month in welfare. The average monthly income of these six women was $503.
When they arrived for their appointments (at Gosnell's office), they were told that they needed $350 to $450 for an abortion procedure. As you can imagine, this seemed like a fortune. And not one had insurance to cover the cost. Thankfully, they turned to us at the Women's Medical Fund, and we were able to help.
The Gosnell story powerfully demonstrates the consequences of the unconscionable public policy under which, if you are poor, pregnant and don't want to be, you are out of luck and on your own. This story reminds us of the lengths to which desperate women will go to terminate an unwanted pregnancy.
How do we help these women - and thousands others? Not by closing a bad practice or unnecessary additional regulations.
What will solve the problem is lifting the ban on public funding for abortion and providing equitable health coverage for all.
Yet right-wing (Republican) legislators are intent on doing the opposite - making it impossible or difficult to get abortion coverage in the exchanges that are being set up and due to be operational in 2014. In Virginia, two bills are now in the General Assembly - HB 2147 in the House of Delegates introduced by Delegate Cline, and SB 1202 in the Senate, introduced by Senator Obenshain. Both are - simply - immoral and should be defeated.
The cry "no taxpayer funding for abortion" is simplistic and misleading. It appeals to our worst nature - to a self-righteous desire for punishment - in this case, of the most vulnerable. (Of course, one of "us" would never be in that situation - right?) Pregnancy occurs for many reasons - including that a woman feels compelled to have sex and cannot convince the man to use protection. We are talking about power, not morals or lack of morals. Why are so many Americans convinced it's ok to treat women as moral degenerates - and to give men a pass. Why do we want to blame those who most need help? Why won't we treat women decently, morally, humanely? Why won't we work on lifting up women - not keeping them permanently victimized.
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abortion. Show all posts
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Abortion - Winning Issue for Democrats
Will wonders never cease? Politico says that" Abortion was winning issue for Dems." An article by Alexander Burns on November 13 makes these points (but if you're an abortion rights advocate, you should really read the whole article - it's at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45069.html ):
"By branding Republican challengers as outside the cultural mainstream on the issue, Democrats managed to hold on to at least a slice of the political center..." Moderate women made the difference in a handful of key states.
This was counter to what the Dems did in 2006 and 2008, when they ran candidates whose positions on abortion were closely attuned to the socially conservative areas where they sought office.
Dems made abortion a central concern in a handful of battleground Senate races — and they won as a result.
In Colorado, Sen. Michael Bennet beat Ken Buck — a tea party-backed conservative with down-the-line anti-abortion views — after defeating him by 17 percentage points among women.
In Nevada, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pummeled Republican challenger Sharron Angle for opposing abortion in all cases — and in particular, for telling an interviewer who asked about abortion in the case of a rape that some women were able to turn “what was really a lemon situation into lemonade.” Reid won women voters by 11 percentage points and nearly tied Angle among men, losing by just 2 points.
Highly touted Republican Senate candidates also found themselves on the wrong end of the issue in blue-state Washington and California. Washington Sen. Patty Murray ran ads accusing challenger Dino Rossi with wanting to “turn back the clock” on abortion. In California, Planned Parenthood sent out a mailer comparing Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, charging that both “want to make criminals out of women who have abortions and the doctors who perform them” and branding both GOP women “too extreme for California.”
For some voters, the issue appeared to serve as shorthand for a larger network of social and values-related issues. “Candidates’ positions on choice do serve a signaling function, in terms of the kind of person they are and if they are standing up for women or not,” said Deirdre Schifeling, political director of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
"By branding Republican challengers as outside the cultural mainstream on the issue, Democrats managed to hold on to at least a slice of the political center..." Moderate women made the difference in a handful of key states.
This was counter to what the Dems did in 2006 and 2008, when they ran candidates whose positions on abortion were closely attuned to the socially conservative areas where they sought office.
Dems made abortion a central concern in a handful of battleground Senate races — and they won as a result.
In Colorado, Sen. Michael Bennet beat Ken Buck — a tea party-backed conservative with down-the-line anti-abortion views — after defeating him by 17 percentage points among women.
In Nevada, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pummeled Republican challenger Sharron Angle for opposing abortion in all cases — and in particular, for telling an interviewer who asked about abortion in the case of a rape that some women were able to turn “what was really a lemon situation into lemonade.” Reid won women voters by 11 percentage points and nearly tied Angle among men, losing by just 2 points.
Highly touted Republican Senate candidates also found themselves on the wrong end of the issue in blue-state Washington and California. Washington Sen. Patty Murray ran ads accusing challenger Dino Rossi with wanting to “turn back the clock” on abortion. In California, Planned Parenthood sent out a mailer comparing Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, charging that both “want to make criminals out of women who have abortions and the doctors who perform them” and branding both GOP women “too extreme for California.”
For some voters, the issue appeared to serve as shorthand for a larger network of social and values-related issues. “Candidates’ positions on choice do serve a signaling function, in terms of the kind of person they are and if they are standing up for women or not,” said Deirdre Schifeling, political director of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
You Never Know Where You'll Find Courage: Thoughts on Dr. George Tiller
I never met Dr. George Tiller but somehow I feel I know him. I know another doctor who provides late-term abortions and I think they must be very similar - tough, independent, don't like to be told what to do and what not to do. Plain spoken. Honest. You don't provide abortions for women in their 8th or 9th month of pregnancy unless you are very clear as to what is needed and why. Because your life is in danger- so you must be sure that what you are doing is very important.
After I learned yesterday that Dr. Tiller had been murdered, I talked to people who knew him and read articles and statements about him. One thing stood out -this man did a very difficult job because he knew it needed to be done and he had the guts to do it. He didn't wait around for someone else to do it. He didn't turn away. He didn't make excuses. He met a human need.
It helps to know the stories of women who have had these late-term procedures. Imagine - carrying a fetus that was dead. or dying, or so monstrously deformed that life would be short and agonizing. Then imagine you had no alternative but to wait for the contractions, or wait for the caesarean knife. Or wait for the baby to die. I don't know what I would do- maybe I would wait, because I always hope that the worst will not happen, even when there is no hope. But I would not wish that waiting on any other woman. Maybe male politicians can. I can't.
As I continued to think about Dr. Tiller's life, I began to feel he was like Dr. King. Dr. King knew he might not live to see his dream realized - but he carried on. I think Dr. Tiller must have had similar feelings - that he was a marked man but he would carry on. He didn't just provide abortions (actually, his practice provided other services as well and I'm told he helped couples to adopt). He had a vision - that children would be born loved and wanted and that women would have reproductive freedom. He died for the ideals of freedom and of human dignity. Most important, he lived for them. In that way, he was like Martin Luther King Jr. - a person of courage.
After I learned yesterday that Dr. Tiller had been murdered, I talked to people who knew him and read articles and statements about him. One thing stood out -this man did a very difficult job because he knew it needed to be done and he had the guts to do it. He didn't wait around for someone else to do it. He didn't turn away. He didn't make excuses. He met a human need.
It helps to know the stories of women who have had these late-term procedures. Imagine - carrying a fetus that was dead. or dying, or so monstrously deformed that life would be short and agonizing. Then imagine you had no alternative but to wait for the contractions, or wait for the caesarean knife. Or wait for the baby to die. I don't know what I would do- maybe I would wait, because I always hope that the worst will not happen, even when there is no hope. But I would not wish that waiting on any other woman. Maybe male politicians can. I can't.
As I continued to think about Dr. Tiller's life, I began to feel he was like Dr. King. Dr. King knew he might not live to see his dream realized - but he carried on. I think Dr. Tiller must have had similar feelings - that he was a marked man but he would carry on. He didn't just provide abortions (actually, his practice provided other services as well and I'm told he helped couples to adopt). He had a vision - that children would be born loved and wanted and that women would have reproductive freedom. He died for the ideals of freedom and of human dignity. Most important, he lived for them. In that way, he was like Martin Luther King Jr. - a person of courage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
