From the category archives:

abortion

 Sex, Sex, and More Sex by Sue Johanson

Who doesn’t love Sue Johanson?  I grew up listening to the grandmotherly sexpert talk about every sexual taboo imaginable on CBC Radio, and later tuned into late night TV to watch her Sunday Night Sex Show.  Mostly, I tuned in to laugh, because she is quite a character and very funny.  But, I always learned quite a bit from her shows and perhaps because of her, aspired to study sexology and teach people about the positive aspects of their sexuality as well.

I was hoping Sue’s book “Sex, Sex, and More Sex” was going to teach me something new, and leave off where her shows ended.  The book doesn’t do that however.  It is more of a digest of all her Q & A’s on the shows, written down and explained, with a few resources.  This would be a valuable resource for someone who has never watched Sue’s shows, or for young people who don’t have all the answers.  But, I mainly found it repetitive as didn’t offer me anything new or unique.

The book is easily navigated by topic, put in alphabetical order, with a listing as well in the index.  Each topic has a Q & A format, which Sue answers.  Being a registered nurse, many of the topics pertain to STDs, Aids, celibacy, condoms and safety, which is great.  Sue also demystifies many subjects, which, in her day were much more taboo than they are now such as anal sex, bondage and discipline, abortion, hairiness and vaginal farts. (Well, maybe vagina farts didn’t need to be demystified?)  Sue’s focus is always on safety and health, be it physical, or mental.  She also addresses issues that aren’t necessarily sexual like Anorexia, battering and abuse, Osteoporosis, and body image issues.

The information provided in this book is very useful, especially for teens who want the straight facts and I would recommend it for anyone’s daughter, son, niece, nephew, or grandchild who is becoming curious about their own sexuality and asking questions.  Much of what you will find in the book is the type of info that you’d get from places like Planned Parenthood.  Some of it is a bit dated, and I wonder if Sue has ever used some of the toys she recommends, but overall, useful and accurate information.

I guess I was disappointed in the book because I am no longer a teenager, so much of the information I already know.  And, also, the book cannot capture Sue’s witty, no-nonsense personality that she portrayed on her shows, which was one of the best things about watching them.

Obviously, the intended audience is not myself, or other savvy sexperts, but young people who want to know more about sex but are afraid to ask.  I do highly recommend this book for teens and for parents who don’t quite know all the answers either, or aren’t sure how to approach the subject with their kids.

Sex, Sex, and More Sex | Sex Toys | Anal Toys

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

For those who would like to think today’s murder in church of Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider, is an isolated incident, here’s the horrifying news: You are wrong. The pattern is clear and frightening.

In March 1993, three months into the administration of our first pro-choice president, Bill Clinton, abortion provider Dr. David Gunn was murdered in Pensacola, Florida. That was the beginning of what would become a five-fold increase in violence against abortion providers throughout the Clinton years.

Today’s assassination of Dr. George Tiller comes 5 months into the term of our second pro-choice president. For anyone who would like to believe that this is a statistical anomaly, a coincidence that doesn’t portend anything, again, you are wrong.

Link (via Susan Mernit)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — An advocacy group is suing over an Oklahoma law that prohibits a woman from having an abortion unless she first has an ultrasound and the doctor describes to her what the fetus looks like.

In the lawsuit filed Thursday in Oklahoma County District Court, the Center for Reproductive Rights says that the requirement intrudes on privacy, endangers health and assaults dignity.

The law, set to go into effect on Nov. 1, would make Oklahoma the fourth state to require that ultrasounds be performed before a woman can have an abortion and that the ultrasounds be made available to the patient for viewing, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a health research organization based in Washington. The other states are Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Backers of the lawsuit say Oklahoma is the only state to require that the ultrasound screen be turned toward the woman during the procedure and that the doctor describe what is on the screen, including various dimensions of the fetus.

Elizabeth Nash, public policy associate with the Guttmacher Institute, said the Oklahoma law appeared unique in that its intent was that the woman seeking an abortion view the ultrasound images.

More. . .

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Blog for Choice Day

by Viviane on 01/22/2008

in abortion

bfc Blog for Choice Day

Today is Blog for Choice day.

How are you commemorating the 35th anniverary of Roe vs. Wade?

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

blogforchoiceday Blog for Choice Day: Jan. 22nd

On Thursday, January 22nd, celebrate the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade by participating in Blog for Choice day.

This year’s topic: tell us, and your readers, why it’s important to vote pro-choice.

Sign up here.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

by Caitlin Flanagan

THE movie “Juno” is a fairy tale about a pregnant teenager who decides to have her baby, place it for adoption and then get on with her life. For the most part, the tone of the movie is comedic and jolly, but there is a moment when Juno tells her father about her condition, and he shakes his head in disappointment and says, “I thought you were the kind of girl who knew when to say when.”

Female viewers flinch when he says it, because his words lay bare the bitterly unfair truth of sexuality: female desire can bring with it a form of punishment no man can begin to imagine, and so it is one appetite women and girls must always regard with caution. Because Juno let her guard down and had a single sexual experience with a sweet, well-intentioned boy, she alone is left with this ordeal of sorrow and public shame.

In the movie, the moment passes. Juno finds a yuppie couple eager for a baby, and when the woman tries to entice her with the promise of an open adoption, the girl shakes her head adamantly: “Can’t we just kick it old school? I could just put the baby in a basket and send it your way. You know, like Moses in the reeds.”

It’s a hilarious moment, and the sentiment turns out to be genuine. The final scene of the movie shows Juno and her boyfriend returned to their carefree adolescence, the baby — safely in the hands of his rapturous and responsible new mother — all but forgotten. Because I’m old enough now that teenage movie characters evoke a primarily maternal response in me (my question during the film wasn’t “What would I do in that situation?” but “What would I do if my daughter were in that situation?”), the last scene brought tears to my eyes. To see a young daughter, faced with the terrible fact of a pregnancy, unscathed by it and completely her old self again was magical.

And that’s why “Juno” is a fairy tale. As any woman who has ever chosen (or been forced) to kick it old school can tell you, surrendering a baby whom you will never know comes with a steep and lifelong cost. Nor is an abortion psychologically or physically simple. It is an invasive and frightening procedure, and for some adolescent girls it constitutes part of their first gynecological exam. I know grown women who’ve wept bitterly after abortions, no matter how sound their decisions were. How much harder are these procedures for girls, whose moral and emotional universe is just taking shape?

(more . . . )

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

 60626 main large Mini Storage Billboard Aims At Abortion Rights Activists (NY Sun)
Photo by Konrad Fieldler

A Manhattan Mini Storage billboard on Manhattan’s West Side Highway is again stirring up both opprobrium and approbation.

A large sign at 44th Street and Twelfth Avenue shows a wire hanger with the words “Your closet space is shrinking as fast as her right to choose.” (more. . . )

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

By Anna Quindlen

Aug. 6, 2007 issue – Buried among prairie dogs and amateur animation shorts on YouTube is a curious little mini-documentary shot in front of an abortion clinic in Libertyville, Ill. The man behind the camera is asking demonstrators who want abortion criminalized what the penalty should be for a woman who has one nonetheless. You have rarely seen people look more gobsmacked. It’s as though the guy has asked them to solve quadratic equations. Here are a range of responses: “I’ve never really thought about it.” “I don’t have an answer for that.” “I don’t know.” “Just pray for them.”

You have to hand it to the questioner; he struggles manfully. “Usually when things are illegal there’s a penalty attached,” he explains patiently. But he can’t get a single person to be decisive about the crux of a matter they have been approaching with absolute certainty.

A new public-policy group called the National Institute for Reproductive Health wants to take this contradiction and make it the centerpiece of a national conversation, along with a slogan that stops people in their tracks: how much time should she do? If the Supreme Court decides abortion is not protected by a constitutional guarantee of privacy, the issue will revert to the states. If it goes to the states, some, perhaps many, will ban abortion. If abortion is made a crime, then surely the woman who has one is a criminal. But, boy, do the doctrinaire suddenly turn squirrelly at the prospect of throwing women in jail. (more. . . )

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

By ATUL GAWANDE

One statistic seems to me to give the lie to all the rhetoric about abortion, and it’s this: one in three women under the age of 45 have an abortion during their lifetime. One in three. All politicians — Democrat and Republican — say they want to make abortion at least rare (as Giuliani did in Wednesday’s debate). On, this they could reach agreement. But it’s clear they haven’t been serious; the U.S. has 1.3 million abortions a year.

Reducing unintended pregnancy is the key — half of pregnancies are unintended, and 4 in 10 of them end in abortion. For a while now, we’ve had solid evidence about how to effectively do this. But it requires getting specific about two subjects that are perilous in politics: sex and contraception. That, politicians won’t do. So let me try to help with four facts everyone needs to know.

Fact one is that, with children, parents do matter. Reviews of multiple studies have shown that parents who maintain a close relationship with their teenage children, monitor them carefully, and send a certain message about sex actually do reduce unintended pregnancies. That message, when most effective, is neither permissive about sex nor focused only on abstinence, but instead combines two components. First, it emphasizes throughout high school that teenagers should wait until they’re older to have sex (because the majority regret not waiting; because having a child as a child wrecks their lives); and second, it makes it clear that when they ultimately have sex, they should always use protection.

More children are, in fact, getting this message. Pregnancies at age 15 to 17 are down 35 percent since 1995, according to federal data; one-fourth of the drop is from delaying sex, and three-fourths is from increased use of contraceptives. Today, just 7 percent of abortions occur in minors.

Fact two follows from this: Abortion is mainly an adult problem. Forty-five percent of abortions occur in adults ages 18 to 24; 48 percent occur after age 25. Most are in women who have already had a child. The kids are all right. We are the issue.

Fact three is that our biggest problem is not using contraception properly: 92 percent of abortions occur in women who said they used birth control. Six in 10 used contraception the month they got pregnant. The others reported that they had used birth control previously but, for one reason or another, not that month. (Many, for example, say they didn’t expect to have sex.) The trouble appears to be blindness to how easy it is to get pregnant and what it takes to make birth control really work.

Oral contraceptive pills, for example, are nearly 100 percent effective when used consistently. But in the real world, they fail 8 percent of the time — that is, 8 in 100 women on the pill get pregnant in a year. The lower dose hormone formulations used nowadays have fewer side effects, but missing a dose by even six hours puts a woman at serious risk. (One should add condoms for that whole month, experts say.) Miss two days and one is effectively not on birth control at all. Anyone prone to missing really needs to consider switching methods.

Birth control requires constancy, and most people overestimate how constant they can be. Fifteen percent of women who rely only on condoms get pregnant in a year, largely from inconsistency in using them. Withdrawal is even more dicey — it has a 25 percent failure rate.

The most effective methods are long-lasting: I.U.D.’s are safe and nearly 100 percent effective in actual practice. So is Implanon (the under-the-skin implant which replaced Norplant) and surgical contraception. But no method is perfect. Each has downsides — costs, risks, side effects. Every woman must weigh them. A few good Web sites have the details. WebMD is one, for example. But this is where you come to the last fact.

Fact four: you have to educate yourself. The details matter. An effective national campaign would provide the details — on television, on billboards — and actively use what evidence shows works best to cut our massive rate of unwanted pregnancies. But politics precludes this. There’s not going to be such a campaign anytime soon.

Nonetheless, there’s no reason you have to join the one in three — or as a male, contribute to it. You just have to understand: the effort is strictly Do-It-Yourself.

Atul Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and a New Yorker staff writer, is the author of the new book “Better.” He is a guest columnist this month.

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

Chris Hedges (former Middle East NYT Bureau Chief) writes:

The denial of contraception, as is well documented, increases the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions. And abortion is never going to go away. If it again becomes illegal, the rich, as in the past, will find ways to provide abortions for their wives, mistresses and girlfriends, and the poor will die in unhygienic back rooms.

But since this is a war with a wider agenda, abortion statistics and facts do not count. The Christian right fears pleasure, especially sexual pleasure, which it sees as degrading, corrupting and tainted. For many, their own experiences with sex — coupled with their descent into addictions and often sexual and domestic abuse before they found Christ — have led them to build a movement that creates an external rigidity to cope with the chaos of human existence, a chaos that overwhelmed them. They do not trust their own urges, their capacity for self-restraint or judgment. The Christian right permits its followers to project evil outward, a convenient escape for people unable to face the darkness and the psychological torments within them.

(more. . .)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

BY JAMES T. MADORE
james.madore@newsday.com

April 26, 2007

ALBANY – Responding to concerns that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn its decades-old Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision, Gov. Eliot Spitzer signaled yesterday his intention to enshrine those rights in state law.

Spitzer, in prepared remarks, said he planned to introduce a bill “establishing a fundamental, statutory right to privacy for women in making personal reproductive decisions.”

He also noted that abortion was legalized in New York in 1970, long before the Roe decision, but “our law became outdated,” the speech text reads.

Spitzer’s move came a week after the high court, in a 5-to-4 decision, upheld the federal ban on a specific late-term abortion procedure that opponents term “partial birth abortion.” The ruling was a reversal from prior decisions, and showed the impact of two newly appointed conservative justices. (more…)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.

The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion.

The opponents of the act “have not demonstrated that the Act would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

The decision pitted the court’s conservatives against its liberals, with President Bush’s two appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, siding with the majority.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also were in the majority.

It was the first time the court banned a specific procedure in a case over how — not whether — to perform an abortion.

Abortion rights groups have said the procedure sometimes is the safest for a woman. They also said that such a ruling could threaten most abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy, although government lawyers and others who favor the ban said there are alternate, more widely used procedures that remain legal.

(Read more…)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

By Elizabeth Wood

Please email them and request that they issue a correction ASAP

In Time Magazine article about the pro-choice movement in Mexico, about about anti-abortion politics in Latin America more generally, the author describes Emergency Contraception as “abortion inducing.”

Underground abortions are one of the leading causes of maternal mortality in Chile. Although Chile has one of South America’s strictest anti-abortion codes, it’s estimated to have twice as many abortions each year (200,000) as Canada — a country with twice Chile’s population. (Abortion is legal in Canada.) As a result, Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, a socialist, late last year sanctioned the free distribution of abortion-inducing “morning-after” contraception pills at government-run hospitals. (Emphasis mine.)

This is a major problem. Not only is it inaccurate, but to describe emergency contraception as an abortion-inducing pill is to greatly reduce its chances of acceptance by people who oppose abortion, and increase the stigma attached to its use.

Click here and then on the author’s name (small print, left side, just below the title) to send an email to the editor! Ask them to issue a correction ASAP

Thanks to Feministing for the alert!)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

A bid to force doctors offering abortion or contraception advice to under-16s to inform the child’s parents has been rejected by MPs.

Tory MP Angela Watkinson argued that current sex education encouraged girls to have sex before they were ready.

But MPs voted by 159 to 87 to retain the current guidelines guaranteeing confidential advice to under-16s.

For the Lib Dems, Dr Evan Harris argued that child protection and patient confidence had to be retained.

About 4,000 under-16s a year have abortions in England and Wales.

‘Shamefully high’

Mrs Watkinson said current policy was not working as the rate of abortions, pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease among young teenagers was “shamefully high”.

Presenting her Contraception and Abortion (Parental Information) Bill to the Commons on Wednesday, she said the “plethora of information” on contraception gave encouragement and false assurances to young girls.

“All the indications are that many children are becoming sexually active well before they are either emotionally or physically mature,” she said.

She said the free provision of the morning after pill had not reduced teenage pregnancies, of which there were 7,464 in 2005 – some mothers as young as 13.

“It’s time to try a different approach.”

(Read more…)

{ Comments on this entry are closed }