<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>Karen Tomb's blog</title>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/karen-tomb"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/974/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/974/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2007-08-16T14:36:27-04:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>US Stamp Honoring Family Planning?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/08/16/us-stamp-honoring-family-planning" />
    <id>http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/08/16/us-stamp-honoring-family-planning</id>
    <published>2007-08-16T14:16:15-04:00</published>
    <updated>2007-08-16T14:36:27-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>Karen Tomb</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Leading Voices" />
    <category term="Contraception" />
    <category term="International Organizations" />
    <category term="Maternal Health" />
    <category term="Sexuality Education" />
    <category term="Women’s Rights" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[  <p>A postage stamp encouraging <a class="glossary-term" href="/glossary/term/122" rel="nofollow">family planning</a>? From a conservative US Administration? No, you haven't entered the Twilight Zone, it really happened -- and speaks volumes about where we are today.</p>      ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[  <p> As I was going through boxes  of old keepsakes, imagine my surprise at discovering a U.S. postage  stamp commemorating <a class="glossary-term" href="/glossary/term/122"><acronym title="family planning: Auto generated by glossary_taxonomy_nodetitle, for family planning">family planning</acronym></a> affixed to a letter I received from  a college classmate in 1972.  While the contents of this and the  many other letters I exchanged with friends during this tumultuous time  were geared more to opposing President Nixon and his policies, apparently  family planning was not only supported by the Nixon administration,  but enjoyed sufficient public acceptance to warrant a commemorative  postage stamp (albeit one that looked like it came straight out of the  Dick and Jane books or the Leave It to Beaver TV show).   </p>
<p>To satisfy my curiosity, I  went to the USPS website where I learned that only &quot;...themes of  widespread national appeal and significance will be considered for commemoration&quot;  because &quot;stamps portray the American experience to a world audience  . . . .&quot; In announcing the appearance of the stamp at a gathering  of Planned Parenthood Federation supporters, JT Ellington, the then-director  of the Postal Service&#39;s office of communication, was quoted in the March  18, 1972 New York Times saying &quot;We hope. . .this stamp will serve  as a reminder to all members of our society. . .that a spiraling world  population and the environmental and social ills that inevitably follow  - is everyone&#39;s concern.&quot;  </p>
<p>What the world sees now is  a presidential administration obsessed with satisfying the radical fringe&#39;s  definition of morality and family values even if it means ignoring sound  public health.  The President&#39;s FY 2008 budget for the sixth year  in a row contained no new funding for <a href="/blog/2007/02/06/bush-whacks-sexual-and-reproductive-health-funding" rel="nofollow">family planning services for low-income  Americans</a>, despite growing needs.    </p>
<p>Internationally, the Bush Administration  has refused to fund UNFPA, the <a href="/issue-briefs/international-organizations" rel="nofollow">United Nations Populations Fund</a>,  for five straight years. UNFPA currently  receives the financial support of 180 countries, making ours the only  country to withhold financial support for <a href="http://www.unfpa.org/about/funding.htm" rel="nofollow">non-budgetary reasons</a>.   200 million women who  want to plan or space their births without access to <a href="http://www.unfpa.org/news/news.cfm?ID=790&amp;Language=1#top" rel="nofollow">family planning  services</a> causes unwanted pregnancies and abortions  to rise. The United States is not immune from this problem - each year  3 million pregnancies, or <a href="http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/pregnancy.html " rel="nofollow">one half of all pregnancies, in the U.S. are  unintended</a> and nearly half of them end in abortion. </p>
<p>Too many policy makers, however,  would rather continue on in the naïve belief that &quot;just say no&quot;  and &quot;abstinence until marriage&quot; are preferable alternatives  to contraceptive use despite research demonstrating that contraception  use improves maternal and infant health and reduces unintended pregnancies,  STDs including HIV, and abortions.  In fact, it appears that this  administration is caving in to the small but vocal contra-contraception  movement whose position is that contraception equals abortion and that  access to these family planning methods must be blocked through <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/magazine/07contraception.html?ex=1304654400%26en=fd92772f01a5c709%26ei=5088%26partner=rssnyt%26emc=rss" rel="nofollow">pharmacists  and political policies</a>. </p>
<p>It is twisted that these policy  makers hold onto these anti-contraception positions - especially when  8 in 10 self-identified &quot;pro-lifers&quot; say that women should  have access to contraception and 86% of voters and 85% of Catholic voters  want government-supported <a href="http://www.nfprha.org/site/c.ggLRIWODKtF/b.1849711/k.DC8D/NFPRHA_Poll_on_Contraception.htm" rel="nofollow">access to contraception</a> for women without  health insurance.    </p>
<p> These views probably aren&#39;t  that different than where Americans were in 1972 - when family planning  was proclaimed as an American value, commemorated in the 8 cent stamp.   </p>      ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
