October 2, 2012
"A Wink and a Nod: Anti-Choice Laws Invite Anti-Choice Harassment and Terrorism," Jen Russo, RH Reality Check: "[F]acilities that provide abortions in states with heavy restrictions on contraception and abortion experience more harassment than do their counterparts in states whose laws tend not to interfere in patients' decisions about birth control and abortion," Russo writes, referencing a recent study she co-wrote in the journal Contraception. The study analyzed the experiences of 357 abortion providers and facilities from a July 2010 Feminist Majority Foundation survey. "When a state government hinders abortion access with baseless restrictions, it adds fuel to the anti-choice fire," Russo concludes (Russo, RH Reality Check, 10/1).
What others are saying about antiabortion harassment:
~ "Study: Antiabortion Laws Inspire Abuse," Irin Carmon, Salon.
"Missouri Fines Insurance Provider $1.5 Million for Not Letting Employers' Personal Beliefs Dictate Contraception Coverage," Amanda Peterson Beadle, ThinkProgress: Missouri insurance regulators have fined Aetna $1.5 million for violating a state law that requires insurers to offer plans without contraceptive coverage to employers with moral or religious objections, Peterson Beadle writes, adding that the settlement comes shortly after Missouri legislators overrode Gov. Jay Nixon's (D) veto of a bill (SB 749) that expands refusal exemptions for insurance coverage of abortion, contraception and sterilization. She states that the measures "directly contradict" the federal contraceptive coverage rules, adding that "Missouri lawmakers cannot change [federal law] with a new or existing law to restrict women's access to birth control" (Peterson Beadle, ThinkProgress, 9/28).
"Why we Should all Care That Texas is 'Dismantling' Women's Health," Thanh Tan, Seattle Times ' "Ed Cetera": "[I]t's worth warning everyone that what happens in Texas can happen anywhere else," Tan writes about the impact of the state's decision to reduce family planning funding by two-thirds and exclude Planned Parenthood from preventive care programs because it offers abortion services. "We've seen numerous states (and even the federal government) try to follow suit and defund family planning by targeting Planned Parenthood, including efforts in Arizona and Pennsylvania," she notes. The efforts are misdirected and shortsighted, she argues, noting that publicly funded family planning is proven to help "break the cycle of poverty, promote self-sufficiency and save taxpayers' money in the long run" (Tan, "Ed Cetera," Seattle Times, 9/28).
What others are saying about access to family planning in Texas:
~ "In Texas, Low-income Women Will Be Offered Ideological Anti-Choice Message in Place of Reproductive Health Care," Kelli Garcia, National Women's Law Center's "Womenstake."
Repro Health Watch — an exciting new edition of the Women’s Health Policy Report — compiles and distributes media coverage of proposed and enacted state laws and ballot initiatives affecting women's access to comprehensive reproductive health care, as well as litigation in response to those provisions.