Repro Health Hub

In the current economic crisis, women across the country are finding the monthly cost of birth control pills is becoming entirely unaffordable. The Reproductive Health Access Project realizes this and has posted a very helpful list on their website of the four major retail stores where women can obtain low-cost birth control pills. Ruth Lesneweski, co-medical director of the Reproductive Health Access Project, explained, “The cost of birth-control pills is prohibitive for the millions of women in the United States who lack health insurance, whose insurance doesn’t cover birth control, or whose insurance requires high co-payments for medication. We hope that knowledge of where to find lower-cost birth control pills will help women avoid unintended pregnancies—which amount to half of all US pregnancies.”

View the full list of pharmacies offering low-cost birth controls pills online here.

 By Myra Batchelder

A recent New York Times article about self-induced abortions in the Latina community provoked much debate within the reproductive health world.

The January 4th article, “For Privacy’s Sake, Taking Risks to End Pregnancy,” examined two studies on do-it-yourself abortions among Latinas in New York, San Francisco, and Boston and featured interviews with community leaders in the Dominican community in Washington Heights. The article focused on the use of misoprostol, a prescription ulcer drug, to self-induce abortion. Misoprostol is one of two drugs used together to induce non-surgical abortion, but it is not approved by the FDA to be used alone for abortion. The article cites misoprostol as one of a number of unconventional, and potentially risky, at-home methods “frequently employed in attempts to end pregnancies by women from fervently anti-abortion cultures despite the widespread availability of safe, legal and inexpensive abortions in clinics and hospitals.”

This article highlights both the barriers that many women, especially those in immigrant communities, face in accessing professional reproductive health care services and the lengths that women will go to end their pregnancies, with or without professional medical care.

But a few experts have criticized the article on “sensationalist” grounds. In a response on RH Reality Check, researchers from Ibis Reproductive Health and Gynuity Health Projects— the organizations that conducted one of the cited studies—said the article overstated both the prevalence of misoprostol use and the dangers associated with it. While clearly not the best abortion option, a Gynuity study attests that misoprostal is effective in 85-90% of cases. Critics also call the article’s assertion that self-induced abortions in New York are “illegal” and “illicit” misleading. Although many states do have laws outlawing self abortion, New York is not one of them.

Still other critics have criticized the myth that “safe, legal, and inexpensive” abortions are readily available. Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas, director of policy and advocacy at New York-based National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, was interviewed for the Times story, and says she is disturbed by the resulting article. “We dispute the Times‘ implication that accessing clinics is very easy,” she said. “There’s the idea among undocumented women that they’ll be deported if they go to a clinic, and the Times is wrong about the price of an abortion being cheap for many women.”

Indeed, the article glosses over the very real and damaging barriers to abortion access faced by many low-income and immigrant women. The Hyde Amendment, passed by Congress in 1976, exempts abortion from the medical procedures covered by federal Medicare funds except in the most extreme cases. With 19 million women who rely on Medicaid for their health care coverage—not to mention the additional 17 million women who are uninsured—many low-income women must pay out of pocket for abortion procedures. As the average cost of an abortion at 10 weeks’ gestation is $370 dollars according to the Guttmacher Institute, this represents a huge barrier to access. The National Institute for Reproductive Health’s Low Income Access Program addresses these very difficulties that all too often prevent low-income women from accessing abortion, contraception, and other important family planning services

Besides cost, cultural obstacles also often plague immigrant women—including fear of telling family members, mistrust of the health-care system, fear of surgery, worry about deportation, and concern about clinic protesters. All of these factors can combine to drive women to taking their abortions into their own hands.

Whatever the problems with the article, the reality of self-induced abortions is a stark reminder that many low-income and immigrant women do not have access to the reproductive health services they need. And a reminder that in the face of restricted access and an anti-choice environment, women will always do what they have to do to end unwanted pregnancies.

For more responses to the article see here.

By Maya Dusenbery

This is a critical time to get in on the ground floor of public policy and work for the changes we need in the arena of reproductive health. This may appear a daunting task, but there are ways you can take action!

The National Women’s Law Center (NWLC) has released a guide that will help you navigate health reform and the specific issues facing women today. The Reform Matters toolkit provides background information on various policies and proposals, as well as best practice ideas for how to effectively get your message across to the media and other outlets.

After you’ve equipped yourself with talking points, let President-elect Barack Obama know what you want and what needs to be done. A new discussion forum on Change.gov, the Obama-Biden transition team’s website, invites all of us to share our concerns about what worries us most about our nation’s health care system. This is our opportunity to clearly communicate to the incoming administration that equal access to quality and affordable reproductive health care is a priority in our country, and that policy changes need to occur to ensure this access. Let’s make our voices heard and enact change!

By Katie Rosenthal

November 16 – 22 is National Homelessness Awareness Week, which raises the country’s consciousness about the myriad issues that those without homes of their own confront every day. One of these issues is finding quality comprehensive reproductive health services. The lack of affordable care options for low-income women, combined with studies that show homeless women face various hindrances to utilizing contraception (Guttmacher Institute 2002), demonstrate that more needs to be done for homeless women and their reproductive rights.

By Katie Rosenthal

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