Tag: Abortion

Categories
Health

The 20-Week Abortion Ban: Everything You Need to Know


On Monday, the U.S. Senate is expected to vote on a GOP bill that basically bans abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy and would threaten doctors who perform them with up to five years in jail. The bill, which has been labeled “The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” passed the House of Representatives in October of last year. While President Trump has said that he plans sign such a bill, it’s unlikely that Republicans, led by senator Lindsay Graham, have the 60 votes necessary for it to pass.

Here’s a guide that outlines the issues at hand:

Why does the ban start at 20 weeks?

Some say, at around 20 weeks post-fertilization, a fetus can feel pain, so Republican lawmakers are using that idea as their main argument in favor of the bill. As one can imagine, this statement is highly controversial and divisive. Most doctors reject this claim, citing a 2005 study that found a fetus was unlikely to feel pain until the third trimester, or around 27 weeks. The New York Times also points out that in 2013 the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists stated that no subsequent research contradicted the 2005 study.

The bill does exempt women who require an abortion quite literally to save their lives, as well as rape and incest survivors, but the legislation does not include exemptions for health conditions or severe fetal anomalies, which often can’t be detected until the 20-week ultrasound.

Does this type of abortion occur frequently?

No, they do not. According to Planned Parenthood, nearly 99% of abortions happen before 21 weeks. When the procedure is performed later, it’s often due to complications that involve “severe fetal anomalies and serious risks to the woman’s health. An abortion at this stage is referred to as a Dilation and Evacuation.

What would this ban mean, really?

The bill would basically limit access to safe abortions by blocking providers from offering the procedure. There are already restrictions on abortions after 20 weeks in a number of states, with exceptions varying between them. This ban would also criminalize doctors who performed the procedure making them vulnerable to up to five years in prison.

Why are Republicans holding a vote if they don’t have the numbers?

As we all know, the debate around the legality and access to safe abortions has been going on for decades in America. While they may not have the votes, conservatives are hoping to pressure Democrats from red states to either vote for it or risk alienating constituents. Per the Huffington Post, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List, told reporters on Thursday: “Clearly, we need more votes, but at some point when you start to get closer, and senators in vulnerable states start to feel the heat, then it starts to look very optimistic.”

Who are the major players for and against the bill?

The bill was introduced by Lindsay Graham and has the support of a large number of Republicans, though GOP Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins have expressed concerns. Democrats Joe Manchin (West Virginia), Joe Donnelly (Indiana), and Bob Casey (Pennsylvania) voted for the legislation in the past and their offices have said they plan to vote for it again.



Source link

Categories
Health

A SofTouch Abortion Only Takes 3 Minutes


You’ve probably never heard of it, but recently a device that has the power to transform the abortion process hit the health care scene. It fits in the palm of a doctor’s hand and doesn’t require an electric suction machine or an operating room or fasting the night before. A patient doesn’t need to be sedated and there are and no limits on her lifestyle either before or after the procedure. In fact, she can get the entire procedure done in her lunch hour an d go right back to work. It’s nonsurgical, noninvasive and is nearly 100 percent effective. It can be completed in 60 to 90 seconds if the patient is less than six weeks pregnant and in about two or three minutes if she’s between six and 10 weeks. The device is called SofTouch. So why haven’t we heard more about it?

For starters, it’s pretty new. SofTouch was first developed in 2011 by Dr. Joan Fleischman, a Harvard-trained physician who believed there had to be gentler and less intrusive way to end a pregnancy in its very early stages. Dr. Fleischman tells Glamour that she had heard horror stories from patients about their abortion experiences, which are often more complex and invasive than necessary. “Most clinics perform the same surgical abortion procedure whether you’re in week four or month four of your pregnancy,” Dr. Fleischman explains. “But an invasive method is unnecessary for ending an early pregnancy.” Her goal was to develop something that felt, well, normal for women going through the process at the beginning of a pregnancy. The idea behind the SofTouch stems from a process called “manual vacuum aspiration” that has actually been around since the `1970s and is considered the safest form of nonsurgical abortion by the World Health Organization.. It involves either electrically or manually sucking out an embryo, but what the SofTouch does differently is reduce both the invasiveness of the procedure and improve the device used to do it. In a SofTouch pregnancy termination, a doctor attaches the device to a smooth, flexible tube and inserts the tip, which is the size of a pencil, into the opening of a woman’s cervix. The doctor then applies light pressure, which quickly and gently releases the menstrual flow and induces a miscarriage. That’s it. No scraping the uterus, no scarring, and and no harm to future fertility.

Another reason the device hasn’t gotten much attention is, simply put, that no one (the health care industry in particular) seems to like change much. Getting funding for awareness and expansion “would require a reorganization of the entire practice of abortion services,” says Dr. Fleischman. According to the Guttmacher Institute’s 2017 Fact Sheet, 59 percent of all abortions are currently provided in abortion clinics, versus only one percent at physicians’ offices. This would flip that statistic on its head, something the industry is typically reluctant to do.

This type of nonsurgical abortion also faces challenges from pro-choice and anti-choice advocates, who blanch at everything from the science to the marketing. Some pro-choice groups have been critical because they say that the topic of abortion is already subject to too much scrutiny and attention—adding another method will just complicate things further. Anti-choice activists claim that Dr. Fleischman and her team have falsified the science used to infer that early pregnancy tissue (tissue from 10 weeks or less) is more similar to a period than a pregnancy. Opponents also say that the advertising is “too positive,” (it focuses on words like “relief” and “natural”), but Dr. Fleischman takes that as a compliment—her mission is to destigmatize the abortion experience.

All this adds up to mean that the SofTouch abortion is currently only available from one provider, Early Options in New York City. It’s $1200 and not covered by insurance (though many abortions are not, and the SofTouch is actually a mid-range option in terms of price). Dr. Fleischman and her team will continue to work to make the procedure more widely available, though. “We research all of our other medical care, but not abortion,” she says. “Would anyone go get a medical procedure these days without doing a thorough search about the options, where it is provided, alternatives, and the doctors who are providing? Yet for abortion, we don’t even think to do our research. We need to talk about it.” And know about our options.



Source link

Categories
Health

How TV Is Tackling Abortion and Pregnancy in Trump's America


Given the daily deluge of political attacks on women’s rights and the female body, it’s no surprise that stories of women choosing to keep or terminate their pregnancies are being elevated on TV. In the last few years, we’ve seen more diverse portrayals of abortion and pregnancy, from shows like Jane the Virgin to Alias Grace. In America, abortion is still—at best—considered taboo, but reproductive rights are gaining more visibility thanks to creators offering real-life scenarios on screen .

Of course, a woman’s right to choose has popped up on television for decades, like on Maude as early as 1972. But these storylines have always come few and far between and are often displayed as shocking, haunting moments. Today, more female creators are showing these narratives in nuanced ways, which feels like a response to the current administration’s crusade against reproductive rights.

Beyond politics, though, women process these experiences differently, which is why it’s refreshing to see varying perspectives play out. These moments are fragile and should be handled deftly, and we need to see broader depictions of pregnancy, from abortion to early motherhood to, more generally, the way we treat women in these situations.

The list below isn’t comprehensive, but they are some of the most important portrayals of pregnancy and abortion on TV right now. Read on.



Source link

Categories
Health

A Federal Appeals Court Just Ruled That an Undocumented Teen Girl Can Get an Abortion


Following an extensive legal battle, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that an undocumented immigrant teen—who is pregnant and has been held in federally-funded shelter—must be allowed to have an abortion “without delay.”

The 6-3 decision from the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit overturns an earlier ruling from a three-judge panel, and as Judge Patricia A. Millett wrote for the majority, it rights a grave constitutional wrong by the government.”

The 17-year-old girl, known in court documents as “Jane Doe,” found out she was pregnant not long after she crossed the border and was detained. Since September, the teen has been trying to obtain an abortion but has been blocked from doing so by the Trump administration—which has not allowed her to leave the government shelter in which she’s been held in order to obtain the procedure.

But as more time has passed, the more urgent her situation has become. The teen is now over 15 weeks along, and because she entered into Texas upon crossing into the country, she’s been subject to the state’s restrictive abortion laws—which included banning the procedure after 20 weeks and adhering to a mandatory ultrasound and waiting period before a woman can have an abortion. Beyond these measures, Texas also requires minors to obtain parental consent before having an abortion—but a state judge waived this stipulation and gave the girl permission to have the procedure.

However, the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Department of Health and Human Services—the branch that oversees the shelter where the teen has been staying—has a less than progressive stance on abortion rights. As Director Scott Lloyd said in a March email (via The Washington Post), ORR facilities “should not be supporting abortion services pre or post-release; only pregnancy services and life-affirming options counseling.”

The ACLU—who represented the teen—argued that the Trump administration was preventing her from exercising her constitutional rights. Last week, US District Judge Tanya Chutkan asked the administration to grant the teen’s request, saying she was “astounded” that the only choices the teen was being given were to carry her pregnancy to term or return to her home country.

“Just because she’s here illegally doesn’t mean she doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Chutkan said last Wednesday, adding that the girl must be given access to an abortion “promptly and without delay.”

The Department of Justice then filed an appeal last Friday and a three-judge panel decided to give the administration until the end of this month to find an adult sponsor who could assist the teen. The girl’s legal team then asked for a full bench to review the case, saying that time was running out for the girl to have an abortion under Texas state laws and all sponsorship options had been exhausted. On Tuesday, the lower court ruling—dating back to last Wednesday—was reinstated and the girl was given permission to have an abortion.

When the girl will have the procedure is unclear, but many are viewing the ruling as not only a major victory for reproductive rights—but for immigrant rights as well.

“Every step of the way, the Trump administration has shown their true colors in this case,” said Brigitte Amiri, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, in a statement.”It’s clear that their anti-woman, anti-abortion, anti-immigration agenda is unchecked by basic decency or even the bounds of the law. No one should have to go to court to get a safe, legal abortion.”



Source link