Repro Health Hub

On October 30, The New York Times ran an article entitled “Women Buying Health Policies Pay a Premium,” which highlighted the widespread disparity between insurance premiums for men and women. The article stated that costs for women ages 19 to 55 can be hundreds of dollars higher than costs for men of the same age because women typically “use more health care, especially in childbearing years.”

National Institute Vice President for National Programs Angela Hooton responded with a letter to the editor today, writing,

To the Editor:

I wish we were more surprised by your article pointing out that women pay higher health insurance premiums — in some cases nearly 50 percent higher — than men (“Women Buying Health Policies Pay a Penalty,” news article, Oct. 30).

Unfortunately, unequal treatment in the area of insurance policies is nothing new — before state contraceptive equity laws were passed, insurance companies routinely failed to cover prescription birth control. This time, however, insurance companies are actually penalizing women for deciding to have children.

We deplore this discriminatory practice and wonder why all of the so-called pro-life, pro-family advocates and legislators aren’t crying out for change. It’s time to see them put their values into action and support legislation similar to New York’s law that outlaws the insurance equity gap; we would think that supporting women and families who decide to become parents is something we could all agree on.

Angela Hooton
V.P. for National Programs
National Institute for Reproductive Health
New York, Oct. 30, 2008

By Tara Sweeney

The Sunday issue of The New York Times featured an article titled “Democrats Carrying Anti-Abortion Banner Put More Congressional Races in Play,” which discussed how the Democratic Party is running anti-choice candidates in some conservative districts in an effort to strip the RNC of its hold on culturally conservative voters.

The DNC has tapped twelve anti-choice Democratic candidates this year, “the highest number of anti-abortion candidates the party has fielded in recent memory to run either for open seats or against Republican challengers.” The article continues that this “is a strategy that has received little attention in an election year dominated nationally by a grim economic picture and an unpopular president.”

National Institute for Reproductive Health President Kelli Conlin called this strategy “misguided,” citing surveys conducted by the National Institute showing that even some Republicans express support for abortion rights when they consider the consequences of banning abortion.

As Conlin told the Times, “The movement to recruit anti-choice candidates ignores the larger reality that this is a pro-choice nation… It misses the larger point.”

By Tara Sweeney

Today the “How Much Time” campaign released its most provocative ad yet—the ad exposes the dangerous reality behind John McCain and Sarah Palin’s desire to ban abortion.

The video, which features real women being photographed for mug shots, forces viewers to consider the potential consequences of a McCain/Palin administration. On more than one occasion, Senator McCain has expressed the belief that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. His running mate, Governor Palin, is opposed to abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, the video explains, “21 states will immediately move to make abortion a crime. And women will be treated like criminals.” The campaign’s use of real women gives a human face to the women who, under John McCain, could be tried, or even jailed, for making the difficult decision to obtain an abortion. What would John McCain do then?

By Allison Farer

Recent anti-choice efforts throughout Indiana have resulted in several local regulations that seriously infringe on a woman’s access to safe and legal abortion care. Two counties have passed regulations that require doctors who provide abortions to establish “admitting privileges,” or formal relationships, with their local hospitals; another county is currently considering a similar ordinance. Neither of these counties currently has abortion providers. A spokesman for Indiana Right to Life confirmed that these ordinances were part of a new anti-choice strategy. Increasingly, these pernicious efforts to restrict rights and access are happening at the local level, reinforcing the urgent need for pro-choice advocates to also use the local level to push forward our own agendas. The Urban Initiative for Reproductive Health is working with local elected officials and public health leaders who are committed to progressive action to ensure and increase access to health care and protect reproductive rights. For examples of local pro-choice efforts, check out the materials from our 2008 National Summit, which featured innovative local strategies to improve reproductive health and reduce barriers to accessing critical health care.

By Emily Alexander

An article in The Boston Globe highlights Senator John McCain’s trivialization of women’s health in last night’s presidential debate. For those of you who missed it, McCain characterized measures to protect women’s health as “extreme.” What’s more, in what can only be interpreted as an attempt to delegitimize and mock the very real concerns of pregnant women, the senator placed air quotes around the word “health.”

“[H]ealth of the mother,” said McCain. “You know that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything. That’s, that’s the extreme pro-abortion position. The quote ‘health.’” Throughout his campaign, McCain has struggled to secure the female vote. His actions, however, from the selection of anti-choice Sarah Palin as a running mate to the assertion that the power to make decisions about women’s bodies should rest in the hands of the state, have proved insulting to women everywhere.

“If McCain is going to regret anything from last night’s debate, it just may be his mocking women’s health to a national audience,” Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said in a statement. “His disregard for women’s health caused a national gasp as McCain let slip the truth about his extreme position on choice – a reality he tends to save for speeches to his far-right base. If women in this country are still undecided, they won’t be after watching last night’s debate.”

By Allison Farer

The Salt Lake Tribune reported on Wednesday that legislators in Utah are planning on sponsoring legislation that will ban abortion except in cases of rape, incest, and the endangerment of a woman’s health. Opponents of the bill criticize the threat it poses to women’s reproductive rights and health and also question the motives of the lawmakers who crafted it. According to the article, Representative Christine Johnson (D-Salt Lake City) referred to the proposed legislation as a “‘political stunt’ by lawmakers trying to get re-elected.” She argued that if lawmakers really want to reduce abortion rates, they should facilitate access to the methods that have proven time and again to reduce the number of abortions performed: birth control and comprehensive sex education.

By Allison Farer

If you are concerned about health care coverage or just staying in tonight and looking for something to watch, check out “Critical Condition,” a new documentary premiering tonight on PBS at 9pm. This powerful documentary follows four hard-working Americans who are coping with the lack of health insurance as they try to battle critical illnesses. The film by Roger Weisberg is an eye-opening look at the look at the current health care crisis in America. Check it out!

For more information and to watch the trailer, go here.

By Myra Batchelder

The Wall Street Journal today highlights the “How Much Time?” campaign, an initiative of the Winning Message Action Fund. This “provocative” campaign aims to air advertisements in key battleground states this election season, asking voters to consider the consequences that would flow from overturning Roe v. Wade. “If abortion is made illegal,” HowMuchTme.org says, “the woman having one will be a criminal. How much time should she do?”

The campaign highlights that if McCain and Palin succeed in the upcoming election, questions like “how much time should she do” will no longer be rhetorical. “When it comes to your personal freedoms,” one of the advertisements reads, “John McCain is worse than George W. Bush.” “Who’s worse than John McCain?” it continues, “Sarah Palin.”

In response to groups like BornAliveTruth.org, which run anti-choice campaigns that distort the conversation on abortion by focusing on gruesome half-truths, the How Much Time campaign brings attention back to how banning abortion will have terrible and dangerous effects on women.

By Allison Farer

Sexual violence is a major cause, directly and indirectly, of teen pregnancy. If we want to end teen pregnancy, we need to end sexual violence against teenagers.

Although I’ve read the many of the relevant statistics before, I’ve never made the connection this clearly, until the SAFER blog alerted me to this article on the website of the Center for American Progress. Written by Malika Saada Saar, the Executive Director of The Rebecca Project for Human Rights, the article draws a clear line between sexual violence against women—especially women of color—and an increased likelihood of becoming pregnant as a teenager.

Some key stats:

An estimated 60 percent of teen girls’ first pregnancies are preceded by experiences of molestation, rape, or attempted rape.

The average age of first intercourse for abused girls is 13.8, in contrast to the national average of 16.2. Only 28 percent of the abused girls used birth control at first intercourse, compared to 74 percent of girls in the general population.

Approximately 40 percent of black women report coercive sexual contact by the time they turn 18. Native Americans are victims of rape or sexual assault at more than double the rate of other racial groups—and are more likely to be victimized by non-Native American perpetrators.

Her whole argument is well worth the read as it points to the need to strengthen ties between the anti-violence and reproductive health communities. Successfully tackling teen pregnancy is going to require tackling sexual violence. Sex ed needs to have anti-violence components. Parents and pediatricians need to talk to teens about sexual violence (not just to women about protecting themselves, but to all teens about respecting everyone’s bodily autonomy). And we need to make sure that any teenager (male or female) who has experienced abuse gets counseling—and that includes making sure such counseling is covered by health insurance and Medicaid. Saar’s article really brought home to me how broadly we need to think about teens’ reproductive health if we truly want to reduce teen pregnancy.

By Nora Niedzielski-Eichner

The fact that teen pregnancy rates in the U.S. top 400,000 annually minght lead some to assert that American teens are more sexually active than teens in other countries.

Not so.

Check out this graphic from The New York Times illustrating that while teen sex is universal,  countries that have implemented comprehensive sex ed, like Denmark and Great Britain, lead the world in preventing unintended teen pregnancy, and subsequently, teen abortion.

By Tara Sweeney