No more pills? No more IUDs? You must be kidding!
Regardless of how split Americans are with regard to the abortion debate, we should all be able to agree on the need to prevent pregnancies. However, an obvious approach to pregnancy prevention is being sidelined by the lack of over-the-counter availability of hormonal contraceptives.
Ultra-conservative religious activists have suffered another set back in their quest to legally define a fertilized egg as a person.
Over the last six months, as an intern at Pathfinder International, I’ve learned a lot about the field of reproductive health. One of the most shocking aspects has been just how many women lack access to contraception (200 million to be exact).
One unintended consequence of Massachusetts’ innovative 2007 reform legislation is reduced contraceptive access for low-income women. We can’t repeat this mistake nationally.
eBay auction to support Roeder’s defense on grounds of “justifiable homicide” proceeds despite earlier promise to nix it.
Uganda experiences the highest unmet need for contraception in sub-Saharan Africa; a judge dismisses Christian adoption agency challenge of stem-cell research process; ACLU responds to criticism of Kentucky Courier-Journal editorial
I really feel that we’re continually fighting a rearguard here. Obama has maintained the status quo (probably) on the Supreme Court. I don’t see a Freedom of Choice Act passing anytime soon. The anti-choicers are out to stop contraception generally, not just abortion, because pregnancy is supposed to be God’s punishment for “easy women.” Combined with Dr. Tiller’s murder and the generally lukewarm response, along with the lack of training for new doctors in abortion care, I worry that we’re going to be seeing a further decline in availability for quite some time.
The National Abortion Federation estimates that as many as 4,000 CPCs operate in the United States, often using deceptive tactics like posing as abortion providers and showing women graphic antiabortion films. While there is growing awareness of how CPCs hinder abortion access, the centers have a broader agenda that is less well known: they seek not only to induce women to “choose life” but to choose adoption, either by offering adoption services themselves, as in Bethany’s case, or by referring women to Christian adoption agencies. Far more than other adoption agencies, conservative Christian agencies demonstrate a pattern and history of coercing women to relinquish their children.
Courtesy of our friends in the feminist blogger/journalist communities in Colorado and throughout the U.S., here are some potential benefits and some additional negative implications of recognizing zygotes, or fertilized eggs, as persons.