Check out the FAQ,Terms of Service & Disclaimers by clicking the
link. Please register
to be able to post. By viewing this site you are agreeing to our Terms of Service and Acknowledge our Disclaimers.
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster.
The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website.
By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Not for discussion - news only: Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion - June 24, 2022 - huge public health implications
Not for discussion - news only: Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion - June 24, 2022 - huge public health implications
Please no comments. While this topic is a huge public health story it is highly charged and we will accomplish nothing here by all offering our personal opinions. No one's mind will be changed by such a discussion.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ended the nation’s constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade. Friday’s outcome is expected to lead to abortion bans in roughly half the states.
The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years in a decision by its conservative majority to overturn Roe v. Wade.
FluTrackers is not religious and we are not political. We have a long history on not taking any position on vaccines, medicines, or any kind of treatment (including abortion).
However, we have a long history on non-violence.
Please - No Violence under any circumstances.
FluTrackers.com @FluTrackers
· 8m
"My father's approach to the most brutal and unambiguous social injustices during the civil rights struggle was rooted in nonviolence as a morally and tactically correct response."
Martin Luther King III
No Violence - tell your friends.
1
3 FluTrackers.com @FluTrackers
· 18m
There have been calls for violence if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade....
PLEASE NO!
Protest Yes - Violence NO
Nothing is gained by violence
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (19-1392)
The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe v. Wade, 410 U. S. 113, and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, are overruled; the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.
Supreme Court of the United States, Supreme Court, Supreme Court of US, Supremecourt, United State Supreme Court, US Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, Court, Docket, Dockets, Opinion, Opininons, Oral Arguments, Justitces, Court Rules, Bar, Merits, Briefs, Order, Orders
"Safety and security don't just happen, they are the result of collective consensus and public investment. We owe our children, the most vulnerable citizens in our society, a life free of violence and fear." -Nelson Mandela
The just-announced U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization represents a stunning reversal of precedent that inserts government into the personal lives and health care of Americans. Yet it was not unexpected. In the long, painful prelude to the decision, many states have severely limited access to reproductive health care. The fig-leaf justification behind these restrictions was that induced abortion was a dangerous procedure that required tighter regulation to protect the health of persons seeking that care. Facts belie this disingenuous rhetoric.1,2 The latest available U.S. data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Center for Health Statistics are that maternal mortality due to legal induced abortion is 0.41 per 100,000 procedures, as compared with the overall maternal mortality rate of 23.8 per 100,000 live births.3,4
Experience around the world has demonstrated that restricting access to legal abortion care does not substantially reduce the number of procedures, but it dramatically reduces the number of safe procedures, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Millions of persons in states lacking protections for abortion care are also likely to be denied access to medication-induced abortions. It may be difficult for many Americans in 2022 to fully appreciate how complicated, stressful, and expensive, if even attainable, their most private and intimate decisions will become, now that Roe has been struck down. A recent New York Times article recounted the experiences of women, now in their 60s and 70s, who sought abortions before Roe.5 They described humiliating circumstances, unsafe procedures literally performed in back alleys, and the deep shame and stigma they endured. Common complications of illegal procedures included injury to the reproductive tract requiring surgical repair, induction of infections resulting in infertility, systemic infections, organ failure, and death.6 We now seem destined to relearn those lessons at the expense of human lives. ...
WASHINGTON, June 17 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers urged Alphabet Inc's (GOOGL.O)leading Google search engine to give accurate results to people seeking abortions rather than sometimes sending them to "crisis pregnancy centers," which steer woman away from the procedures.
...The letter was prompted by a study released last week by the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate. The study found that 11% of the results for a search for an "abortion clinic near me" or "abortion pill" in some states were for centers that oppose abortion.
Please no comments. While this topic is a huge public health story it is highly charged and we will accomplish nothing here by all offering our personal opinions. No one's mind will be changed by such a discussion.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court (https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court) has ended the nation’s
As usual on FluTrackers, we publish UN documents. It is neither an endorsement or repudiation. UN actions/statements are news.
Overturning of Roe v. Wade abortion law a ‘huge blow to women’s human rights’ warns Bachelet
photo redacted due to copyright
Abortion rights supporters march in Washington, D.C. in October 2021. 24 June 2022 Women
Friday’s decision by the US Supreme Court which overturns the 50-year-old Roe v Wade judgement guaranteeing abortion across the United States, was described by the UN human rights chief as “a huge blow to women’s human rights and gender equality.”
The widely anticipated Supreme Court decision, by six votes to three, was made in the specific case of Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health, and Michelle Bachelet said in a statement that it represents a “major setback” for sexual and reproductive health across the US.
The historic decision returns all questions of legality and access to abortion, to the individual states.
Reacting earlier to the US ruling, without making specific reference to it, the UN sexual and reproductive health agency (UNFPA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) noted that a staggering 45 per cent of all abortions around the world, are unsafe, making the procedure a leading cause of maternal death.
The agencies said it was inevitable that more women will die, as restrictions by national or regional governments increase.
Restrictions, ineffective
“Whether abortion is legal or not, it happens all too often. Data show that restricting access to abortion does not prevent people from seeking abortion, it simply makes it more deadly”, UNFPA highlighted.
According to the agencies’ 2022 State of World Population report, nearly half of all pregnancies worldwide are unintended, and over 60 per cent of these may end in abortion.
UNFPA said that it feared that more unsafe abortions will occur around the world if access becomes more restricted.
“Decisions reversing progress gained have a wider impact on the rights and choices of women and adolescents everywhere”, the agency emphasized.
Ms. Bachelet further reminded that access to safe, legal and effective abortion is firmly rooted in international human right law and is at the core of women and girls’ autonomy, and ability to make their own choices about their bodies and lives, free of discrimination, violence and coercion.
“This decision strips such autonomy from millions of women in the US, in particular those with low incomes and those belonging to racial and ethnic minorities, to the detriment of their fundamental rights”, she warned.
The rights chief highlighted that the decision came after more than 50 countries with previously restrictive laws have liberalized their abortion legislation over the past 25 years.
“With today’s ruling, the US is regrettably moving away from this progressive trend”, she said.
Meanwhile, the UN agency, UN Women, cautioned in another statement that the ability of women to control what happens to their own bodies, is also associated with the roles women are able to play in society, whether as a member of the family, the workforce, or government.
Countries’ responsibilities
The 1994 Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), signed by 179 countries including the United States, recognized how deadly unsafe abortions are, and urged all countries to provide post-abortion care to save lives, irrespective of the legal status of abortion.
The document – resulting from a high-level meeting in Cairo, Egypt—also highlighted that all people should be able to access quality information about their reproductive health and contraceptives.
UNFPA, as the custodian of the Programme of Action, advocates for the right of all couples and individuals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children and to have the information and means to do so.
The agency also warned that if unsafe abortions continue, Sustainable Development Goal 3, related to maternal health, to which all UN Member States have committed, will be at risk of not being met.
@WHO
· 3h
Evidence shows that restricting access to #abortion does not reduce the number of abortions that occur. Restrictions are, however, more likely to drive women and girls towards unsafe procedures https://bit.ly/3kA2Z1P
13
Health insurance industry website opinion on coverage......check for any changes with your own provider, however....
snip
For the time being, she said, most health plans in all states will continue to provide coverage for FDA-approved female contraception, including sterilization, long-acting contraception (IUDs and implants) and emergency contraception."
WHY THIS MATTERS
There is a wide variation in how states regulate health insurance coverage, healthinsurance.org said.
Twenty-five states have restrictions on health coverage of abortion. In the other states insurance carriers determine whether their plans will include coverage.
Six states – Oregon, New York, California, Washington, Illinois, and Maine – require all state-regulated health insurance plans to cover abortions. In three of these – Oregon, New York, and Illinois – the health plan must fully cover the cost, while health plans in the other three states can require the member to pay their normal deductible, copays and coinsurance.
There isn't likely to be a major change in how abortion is covered under health plans sold in Affordable Care Act marketplaces, Norris said.
Almost half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended and medical costs for births resulting from an unintended pregnancy are about twice as likely to be publicly financed as are medical costs for intended births.
About 1.25 million unintended pregnancies were publicly financed in 2001. Medical services for women who experience unintended pregnancies and the children who are born as a result of such pregnancies cost taxpayers between $9.6 and $12.6 billion every year ($7,700 to $10,000 per pregnancy).
Unplanned pregnancies are far more likely to result in abortion than are intended pregnancies (40% versus 3%).
Public savings that would result from preventing unintended pregnancies range from $4.7 to $6.2 billion.
The researchers’ average estimate of annual savings ($5.6 billion) “is more than three-quarters the level of federal funding for either the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children ($7.25 billion) or the Head Start and Early Head Start programs ($7.23 billion).”
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Friday said landmark high court rulings that established gay rights and contraception rights should be reconsidered now that the federal right to abortion has been revoked.
Thomas wrote that those rulings “were demonstrably erroneous decisions.”
The cases he mentioned are Griswold vs. Connecticut, the 1965 ruling in which the Supreme Court said married couples have the right to obtain contraceptives; Lawrence v. Texas, which in 2003 established the right to engage in private sexual acts; and the 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which said there is a right to same-sex marriage.
Thomas’ recommendation to reconsider that trio of decisions does not have the force of legal precedent, nor does it compel his colleagues on the Supreme Court to take the action he suggested.
This thesis explores the evolution of Norma McCorvey (1947-2017), better known as “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade, as a symbol of the United States abortion debate. I trace her life from her childhood through her death, examining her decision to become the Roe plaintiff, rise to fame as a symbol of the pro-choice movement, defection to the pro-life movement, subsequent attempts to reverse the Roe decision, and memorializations by various political figures and media outlets. I examine the role that her poverty, education, non-normative sexuality, and whiteness played in the public construction of her as an unreliable figurehead. To make sense of her unconventional political trajectory as well as the spetacularizing media attention she drew over the course of her life, I engage with journalistic and scholarly writing about her, her two co-authored memoirs, and audiovisual representations of her life and activist work. Ultimately, I contest the caricaturization of McCorvey as “the ultimate victim,” a financial opportunist, and “white trash” by contextualizing the challenges she faced due to her class, sexuality, and the shifting rhetoric on abortion between 1970-2017.
Barnard, Christianna K., "Jane Roe Gone Rogue: Norma McCorvey’s Transformation as a Symbol of the U.S. Abortion Debate" (2018). Women's History Theses. 34.
This thesis explores the evolution of Norma McCorvey (1947-2017), better known as “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade, as a symbol of the United States abortion debate. I trace her life from her childhood through her death, examining her decision to become the Roe plaintiff, rise to fame as a symbol of the pro-choice movement, defection to the pro-life movement, subsequent attempts to reverse the Roe decision, and memorializations by various political figures and media outlets. I examine the role that her poverty, education, non-normative sexuality, and whiteness played in the public construction of her as an unreliable figurehead. To make sense of her unconventional political trajectory as well as the spetacularizing media attention she drew over the course of her life, I engage with journalistic and scholarly writing about her, her two co-authored memoirs, and audiovisual representations of her life and activist work. Ultimately, I contest the caricaturization of McCorvey as “the ultimate victim,” a financial opportunist, and “white trash” by contextualizing the challenges she faced due to her class, sexuality, and the shifting rhetoric on abortion between 1970-2017.
This thesis explores the evolution of Norma McCorvey (1947-2017), better known as “Jane Roe” of Roe v. Wade, as a symbol of the United States abortion debate. I trace her life from her childhood through her death, examining her decision to become the Roe plaintiff, rise to fame as a symbol of the pro-choice movement, defection to the pro-life movement, subsequent attempts to reverse the Roe decision, and memorializations by various political figures and media outlets. I examine the role that her poverty, education, non-normative sexuality, and whiteness played in the public construction of her as an unreliable figurehead. To make sense of her unconventional political trajectory as well as the spetacularizing media attention she drew over the course of her life, I engage with journalistic and scholarly writing about her, her two co-authored memoirs, and audiovisual representations of her life and activist work. Ultimately, I contest the caricaturization of McCorvey as “the ultimate victim,” a financial opportunist, and “white trash” by contextualizing the challenges she faced due to her class, sexuality, and the shifting rhetoric on abortion between 1970-2017.
"...there’s an obvious contest that’s happening between different sectors of the colonial ruling class in this country. And they would, if they could, lump us into their beef, their struggle." ---- Omali Yeshitela, African People’s Socialist Party
(My posts are not intended as advice or professional assessments of any kind.) Never forget Excalibur.
Are birth control and abortion connected? Here are the facts.
By Anne Marie Williams, RN, BSN | July 18, 2021, 09:41am
Author and journalist Molly Jong-Fast penned the Vogue article, “The Anti-Birth Control Movement is the New Anti-Abortion Movement,” cutting right to the chase by claiming that “Republicans have started to blur the lines between birth control and abortion in the hopes of making it harder for American women to get both birth control and abortions.” But Jong-Fast’s article fails to acknowledge that it is not “Republicans” who have blurred the lines between abortion and birth control; it is the abortion industry itself. Fact: Some birth control can function as an abortifacient
Jong-Fast specifically referenced the recent debate in Missouri over whether to limit Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood over its provision of potentially abortifacient drugs — such as Plan B and Ella, which are given as “emergency contraception” — and IUDs. Jong-Fast called Missouri’s ultimately unsuccessful attempt to defund Planned Parenthood “a tricky play, attacking birth control as a way to attack abortion, and it didn’t work… this time.” Jong-Fast also quoted Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill-Johnson, who lamented, “We’re already hearing members of the U.S. Congress spread the same falsehoods we’ve seen in Missouri, conflating medications that prevent pregnancy — birth control and emergency contraception — with medications that end pregnancy.”
Jong-Fast either doesn’t understand or purposely ignores the fact that IUDs, emergency contraception and the birth control pillcan function as abortifacients; that is, they can cause early abortions as a secondary mechanism, according to their manufacturers. Fact: The abortion industry blurred the lines decades ago
Though Jong-Fast insists that pro-lifers are the ones erroneously conflating contraception with abortion, in truth, abortion supporters were the ones to falsely deny the abortifacient nature of some contraceptives by redefining widely understood scientific definitions of conception and fertilization. That deception goes back decades....
"...there’s an obvious contest that’s happening between different sectors of the colonial ruling class in this country. And they would, if they could, lump us into their beef, their struggle." ---- Omali Yeshitela, African People’s Socialist Party
(My posts are not intended as advice or professional assessments of any kind.) Never forget Excalibur.
Tweet
Comment