Serial Novel Imagines a Post-Roe World

Linda Hirshman, a lawyer, writer and professor retired from Brandeis University, recently wrote about a post-Roe world in the Washington Post, an article Scott highlighted on the Real Time Blog, and one you should read if you missed.  Linda just released the first chapter of a serial novel, called "Red State", that she will be posting online chapter by chapter.  The novel imagines an America in which the country is divided into Red States, that prohibit abortion, and Blue States that permit abortion.  Introducing her short novel she writes that, post-Roe, "legal scholars predict a world eerily like America before the Civil War, with women fleeing anti-abortion states, the authorities a few steps behind." 

A Closer Look at Colorado Amendment 48: Definition of Personhood

VIDEO: Does Life Begin at Fertilization? Check out this useful post at Coloradoan.com that summarizes arguments for and against the amendment on which Coloradans will vote this November 4. The amendment would change the definition of person to "include any human being from the moment of fertilization." The arguments against supporting the change in definition include worries that redefining person in the Colorado constitution could have unanticipated legal consequences, that the amendment could limit the exercise of independent medical judgment, and, perhaps most worrisome:

Amendment 48 may limit the ability of individuals to make private, personal choices about their lives and health. The measure could be used to limit access to abortions and to prohibit medical care, including emergency contraception, commonly used forms of birth control, and treatments for cancer, tubal pregnancies, and infertility. The amendment may restrict some stem-cell research that could lead to life-saving therapies for a variety of disabilities and illnesses.

Stop the Undeclared War on Family Planning and Contraception

A great opinion piece in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution written by the president of the Heinz Family Philanthropies, Jeffery R. Lewis, rails against the Bush administration's "aggressive, 11th-hour attempt to redefine contraception as abortion." 

The new rule is a carefully crafted ruse to obstruct public access to contraception methods that are used by more than 37 million American women and men to act responsibly, stay healthy and plan for strong families.

Federally funded comprehensive family planning programs — such as those implemented by states, municipalities and community health centers — could start refusing to offer women and men education on responsible sexual behavior and access to contraception.

Comprehensive family planning programs have helped low-income families get the education and contraception they need to act responsibly. They prevent an estimated 1.3 million unplanned pregnancies and 630,000 abortions each year. Every dollar spent on them saves an estimated $4.02 in pregnancy-related and newborn care costs to Medicaid.

These health centers also provide screenings for HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections, identifying thousands of cases that would otherwise go undetected and untreated. And they address women’s broader health needs by conducting millions of breast screenings and Pap tests. Over two decades, they have detected 55,000 cases of invasive cervical cancer, saving lives and money.

By law, federally funded services cannot provide abortion. What they provide is age-appropriate sex education, counseling and contraception that are effective in preventing unplanned pregnancies and the need for abortion.

A look past the lofty rhetoric reveals a policy guided by ideology, not science, and an aggressive, 11th-hour attempt to redefine contraception as abortion — an extremist view that few Americans in either party support.

The 30 day public commenting on the "first move in a new, undeclared war on contraception" concluded last week with over 200,000 comments sent to Department of Health and Human Services director Michael Leavitt.  The HHS is reviewing comments and will decide whether or not to implement the proposed rule in the coming weeks.