Monthly Archive for December, 2012

Who really cares about women’s health? Listen to your doctor

Published on December 14, 2012 in Andrea Friedman and Reproductive Health. 5 Comments
Andrea Friedman

Andrea Friedman, Director of Reproductive Health Programs, National Partnership

Cross posted from RH Reality Check.

The October 18 edition of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) features a compelling “sounding board” titled, Legislative Interference with the Patient-Physician Relationship. “Increasingly in recent years,” the authors argue, “legislators in the United States have been overstepping the proper limits of their role in the health care of Americans to dictate the nature and content of patients’ interactions with their physicians.” The piece addresses laws regarding a number of areas of health care, but a primary focus of the interference the authors challenge is women’s health, and particularly access to abortion care.

This argument comes not from an advocacy group with a political agenda, but from leaders of the medical community — the heads of the American College of Physicians, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American College of Surgeons. It follows on the heels of a resolution by the American Academy of Family Physicians and a Statement of Principles on the Role of Governments in Regulating the Patient-Physician Relationship by the American College of Physicians.  The piece was endorsed just this week by the Council of Medical Special Societies, which represents 39 organizations and over 700,000 physicians.

And around the country, state medical associations have been taking up the cause, openly opposing harmful laws.  From the Idaho Medical Association:

“It is the policy of the IMA [Idaho Medical Association] to oppose inappropriate interference by the government and third parties that causes a physician to compromise his or her medical judgment as to what information or treatment is in the best interest of the patient.”  (Idaho Medical Association House of Delegates July 27 – 29, 2012, Resolution 04 (12) Protecting the Patient-Physician Relationship)

And the Texas Medical Association:

“The sanctity of the patient-physician relationship is the foundation of health care in America, and it must be preserved to assure candid communication and allow patients to evaluate their care options. The Legislature’s role should not be to dictate how physicians and patients communicate with one another or what procedures and diagnostic tests must be performed on a given patient.” (Letter from the Texas Medical Association opposing SB16 requiring an ultrasound before a woman can obtain an abortion, full letter available here.)

These statements are a sharp rebuke to legislators around the country busy passing laws that interfere with women’s health care. These are laws that mandate ultrasounds whether or not they are medically necessary; laws that require women to receive baseless, medically inaccurate information such as being told abortion causes breast cancer or suicidal tendencies; laws that make women wait as much as three days before getting an abortion; and laws that limit access to medication abortion, forcing some women to have an unnecessary surgical procedure, and the list goes on. As stated in the NEJM, “by reducing health care decisions to a series of mandates, lawmakers devalue the patient–physician relationship. Legislators, regrettably, often propose new laws or regulations for political or other reasons unrelated to the scientific evidence and counter to the health care needs of patients.”

Anti-choice lawmakers often try to argue that these laws promote women’s health and protect women from bad decisions.  But the reality is just the opposite; they harm women by taking the important decisions about their individual care away from them and their doctors and instead put them in the hands of politicians.

The medical community has been clear, intrusive laws restricting abortion care undermine the relationship between health care providers and their patients and are based on political ideology, not on providing the best possible care. This latest series of rebukes should put to rest the specious, transparent and patently false argument that these laws help women.  They have no purpose other than to put up barriers to accessing abortion care and shaming and stigmatizing the women who are able to overcome those barriers.

They do not promote women’s health – they harm it.  Don’t believe me?  Just ask your doctor.

 

 

Voters Want Action on Family Friendly Workplace Policies

Published on December 12, 2012 in Debra Ness and Work & Family. 0 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

Cross-posted from the Huffington Post.

Despite all of the attention paid to our differences this election year, the majority of American voters are united on some key issues because of shared experiences. They face fierce challenges when it comes to managing health and financial security, and they share the near-universal belief that Congress and the president should consider policies that will help.

These are the findings of a new poll released by the National Partnership for Women & Families – and they couldn’t come at a better time, just as lawmakers new and old assess their priorities for the coming year.

According to the poll results, 86 percent of voters nationwide think it is important for Congress and the president to consider new laws such as paid sick days and paid family and medical leave insurance to promote families’ economic security. Nearly two-thirds say it is “very important.” This strong support extends across demographic and party lines.

That isn’t surprising considering that nearly three-quarters of the 2012 voters surveyed said they often struggle to meet work, family and personal responsibilities; and 72 percent said they would be likely to face financial hardship if they or a family member had a serious illness or a new child arrived. Across the board, workers and their families are feeling the impact of workplaces that are badly out of sync with their lives.

That’s because more than 40 percent of the private sector workforce in the United States cannot earn a single paid sick day. Just 11 percent have paid family leave through their employers. And fewer than 40 percent have employer-provided paid medical leave through short-term disability insurance policies. As a result, many are forced every day to make impossible choices between the well-being of their families and their financial security.

America’s workers and their families have had enough of our nation’s outdated workplace policies — and they want action from lawmakers. Notably, the very voter groups garnering attention for their impact on the election this year feel strongest about the need for Congress and the president to act: 79 percent of Latinos, 77 percent of African Americans and 69 percent of women considered it “very important.”

So, as the dust from the election settles, lawmakers should be listening to the voters and constituents they have been elected to serve. That means prioritizing real solutions to the real challenges facing real people in this country.

Legislation that would guarantee workers the right to earn paid sick days, the Healthy Families Act, has been introduced in the last two Congresses. The new Congress should pass it right away. Lawmakers are also expected to work this year on a national paid family and medical leave insurance program that would offer a much-needed update to the Family and Medical Leave Act passed nearly 20 years ago. It should be a high priority as well.

These modest, reasonable proposals would go a long way toward protecting the health and economic stability of our families while also strengthening our economy. America’s workers and families need and deserve them. It’s time for lawmakers to act.

For topline poll results, go to www.NationalPartnership.org/ElectionPoll.

One Year Later, Let’s Make Emergency Contraception More Easily Available to Vulnerable Young Women

Published on December 7, 2012 in Debra Ness and Reproductive Health. 2 Comments

Debra Ness, President, National Partnership

For more on the truth about Emergency Contraception, take a look at our fact sheet.

A year ago, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was poised to undo the damage done by the Bush Administration, which for political reasons held up over-the-counter approval of Emergency Contraception (EC) for years. The FDA was charged with examining the best scientific evidence and after doing so, it decided to allow EC to be sold over the counter, without a prescription, to people of all ages. However, at the last moment, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius overruled the FDA, maintaining the requirement that women under 17 obtain a prescription for EC.

The National Partnership strives to ensure that all women have access to quality, comprehensive health care based on medical need. We know that politics has no place in medicine. And in this case, the evidence clearly shows that EC over the counter is safe and that even younger teens are able to use it safely.

Young women facing possible unplanned pregnancies because of missed birth control, contraceptive failure or sexual assault need quick and easy access to EC, not unnecessary obstacles put in their way. As I said at the time, “women and girls are at risk for unintended pregnancies every day. Creating barriers that impede and deny access to a safe, time-sensitive medication that helps prevent unintended pregnancy solves nothing.”

The medical community agrees. Last month, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a recommendation that pediatricians discuss EC with their patients and provide them with prescriptions for the drug so they are prepared in advance.

The HHS decision was aimed at teens, but it hurts all women. Because of this restriction, all women must have government-issued identification and find a pharmacy open and willing to provide EC when they need it, rather than simply being able to pick it up at any time off the shelf. And those restrictions, like all ID requirements, fall most heavily on those who are marginalized.

The Obama Administration has made great and hugely commendable strides in improving women’s access to health care, including contraception, through the Affordable Care Act. But a year after the HHS decision, women continue to lack full access to necessary and basic health care. We call on HHS to reconsider this decision, look again at the scientific evidence, and work to ensure that all women who need it have timely and private access to EC.