Welcome To CT

My Left Nutmeg

A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

helphaiti

Donate to CT Dems
Enable ActBlue
for CT Races
$
John Larson
(1st CD)
$
Joe Courtney
(2nd CD)
$
Rosa DeLauro
(3rd CD)
$
Jim Himes
(4th CD)
$
Chris Murphy
(5th CD)
$
Ads on My Left Nutmeg
 
 


 
Contact Info
To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

My Left Nutmeg

CT Rape Victims Still Not Getting Emergency Contraception

by: Matt Browner Hamlin

Fri Jan 19, 2007 at 07:46:41 AM EST


This is shocking. Despite being available secular and Catholic hospitals, 40% of Connecticut's rape victims are not offered Plan B emergency contraception when they have rape examinations. What are the hospitals waiting for?

Even as the Plan B emergency birth control pill was heading toward more widespread availability at pharmacy counters, 40 percent of rape victims who sought care at Connecticut hospitals in the first half of 2006 were not offered the medication or were sent home without the full dose of the drug needed to prevent pregnancy, rape counselors say.

The continuing reluctance of hospitals - both Catholic and secular - to dispense the pills has prompted women's advocates to once again push the legislature to pass a law requiring all hospitals to provide the pill as a routine part of rape examinations.


Women aren't being offered the treatment they need or even the correct treatment when they do get it. Some Catholic hospitals are resisting the legislative push on the grounds that it would violate their freedom of religion. Apparently the freedom of religion now includes the right to deliberately misunderstand how a medical treatment works.

Jennifer Barrows, a spokeswoman for the Connecticut Hospital Association... said that the association, which represents the state's 31 hospitals, has not taken a position on the Plan B issue because the Catholic hospitals are members and asked that the trade group remain neutral.

Although there is some uncertainty about exactly how the Plan B pill works, church leaders contend that hormones in the drug could prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus, an event they equate with abortion.

But medical experts say that the hormones in the pills more likely prevent pregnancy by delaying or preventing ovulation.

I'm sure rape victims around Connecticut will be sure to thank Hartford Courant reporter Hilary Waldman for her balanced presentation of church leaders' profound misunderstanding of how emergency contraception works and why it's contraception. The uncertainty as to how Plan B works resides solely with the anti-abortion activists who falsely believe that this form of contraception is somehow an abortion. This misrepresentation, as characterized by Waldman, is clearly based on a false understanding of how the female reproductive organs are laid out and how the process of fertilization takes place.

There are many reasons to require that Plan B be a mandatory part of every rape examination in Connecticut. It's criminally unfair to ask rape victims to remember to ask for emergency contraception - many people don't know how Plan B works and as Connecticut's church leaders show, many have the false impression that taking Plan B equates to having an abortion. Plan B works best when taken closely after intercourse; giving it at a hospital during a rape exam is likely the earliest point when it can be provided to most rape victims. Delaying taking emergency contraception any later than during the exam raises the risk of making the drug ineffective. Women under eighteen can't buy Plan B over the counter, but they can get it at hospitals; mandating emergency contraception in rape exams would ensure that minors are not at greater risk for being impregnated as the result of a rape. Lastly, because the state of Connecticut reimburses hospitals for every pill of Plan B that they dispense (while it could cost women $60 to buy the pill on their own), it saves rape victims from deciding whether or not they can afford to to take emergency contraception.

The need to mandate that Connecticut's hospitals provide rape victims with emergency contraception is clear. Let's push Democrats to get behind Senator Mary Ann Handle's (D-Manchester) bill that accomplishes this sensible goal.

Matt Browner Hamlin :: CT Rape Victims Still Not Getting Emergency Contraception
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Stupid. (4.00 / 1)
If the woman manages to injure her attacker and that guy goes to one of these hospitals, does he not get anesthesia because maybe it's against their religion to rape someone?  On the contrary, I'm sure every stop is pulled to repair that damage.

To make sure rape victims can forego HUGE medical complications from that crime, society will have to work harder to put this remedy in the hands of women.  So more women will have it and maybe use it in cases other than rape. 
So counter to what the hospitals' goals are, to refuse this treatment is to spread the use of this treatment.

I'm not arguing for terribly strict controls on the drug.  And I don't want to have to invent a hardship to gain access to it.  I'm just saying that in same way abstinence-only education raises the numbers of unwanted pregnancies, this situation will only produce bad outcomes.


Compassionate Care for Rape Victims (0.00 / 0)
Last week I was invited to phone bank at Planned Parenthood in New Haven. We called supporters of PPH to ask them to call their legislators regarding the new Emergency Contraception bill, officially filed as .

Proposed Bill 685: An Act Concerning Compassionate Care for Victims of Sexual Assault

Last year a version of this bill "died in committee" as time ran out and legislators dragged their heels. Remember that Joe Lieberman returned to Connecticut in March to proffer his horrifying opinion that he believes hospitals that refuse to give contraceptives to rape victims for "principled reasons" shouldn't be forced to do so.

"In Connecticut, it shouldn't take more than a short ride to get to another hospital" he said.

The new horror, not highlighted by Matt, is in the linked Courant article. [emphasis added]

Barry Feldman, general counsel to St. Francis Hospital and Medical Center in Hartford and a spokesman for the state's four Catholic hospitals, said that requiring the Catholic hospitals to provide Plan B would violate a law that restricts the state from interfering with religious freedom.

"I hope we can find a solution that does not interfere with the Catholic hospitals' freedom of religion," Feldman said Thursday. "This tiny pill does not need to be given in a hospital," he said.

Good thinkin', Feldman. Between the small state and the short ride and the tiny pill, we have no problem dragging our friends bloody ripped carcasses through the streets from hospital to pharmacy and back.

Since we cannot stop people from insensitivity and brutishness in the name of religion, the least we can do is insist on proper health care for victims of assault.

There will be a lot more to say on this matter in the coming months. I am so angry that I may post again this weekend about the issue.

"I am not a Blogger...But I play one on the internet."


This interferes with the freedom of religion of the victim (4.00 / 1)
Can it be argued that the withholding of the medical care is in fact a violation of the religious freedom of the victim or patient, who does not agree with the views of the "provider" but is nonetheless being subjected to their views?  I'd be so pissed if somebody tried that -- but others report being distressed and frightened about what to do next and where to turn for help.

When professional medical care is denied and a modified treatment plan substituted in order to accommodate not the patient's needs but the provider's personal views, this is not the provision of medical care.  This is a person, licensed to provide medical care in some way, who is willfully perverting the practice of medical care by placing their own personal views in obstruction to the delivery of medical care.  The outcome and prognosis for the patient can be compromised by this obstruction, and I hope some of these people and organizations get their asses sued off.  That seems to be the only thing that scares them.

The patient has not entered into a contract to be converted,  corrected,  chastised, or subjected to the gauntlet of another's religious views  -- all they patient seeks from the provider is competent medical care, delivered within the parameters of professional medical standards.  To receive religious judgement in the guise of medical care from someone who professes to offer medical care demeans the medical and health professions, constitutes a misrepresentation to the patient, endangers the health of the patient seeking timely care, and involves the patient in controversies relating to others' religious beliefs that it was not their intention to engage in. 

Also, medical doctors supposedly live by the oath, "First, do no harm."  How is it not psychologically and medically harmful to deny timely emergency contraception to a woman who has been raped?

And should government aid be provided to hospitals that wish to practice not medicine but religion as expressed through their version of medicine?  Where are the adults here?

Here's a quote that encapsulates at least one of the arguments, from a WAPO article:

"As soon as you become a licensed professional, you take on certain obligations to act like a professional, which means your patients come first," said R. Alta Charo, a bioethicist and lawyer at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. "You are not supposed to use your professional status as a vehicle for cultural conquest."

Health care professionals moved to adopt authoritarian, prescriptive stances that they justify through their participation in proselytizing-type religions moves them from care givers to oppressors and enforcers in one fell swoop.  This is an abuse of their power as professionals in a highly vulnerable moment of a patient's life.

Not to successfully address this issue through professional education and standards and legislation only risks that zealotry corrodes and erodes the public's attitude toward the possibilities of any doctor-patient relationship.

If this is allowed to continue, I can only wonder what the personality profile will be of the types of people who choose to get training in "medicine".  It's almost as gruesome as some science fiction to contemplate.

When, under the justification of religious belief, a victim of sexual assault ( a crime of dominance and power over the victim) becomes  immediately again the victim of inappropriately exercised dominance over that person's access to medical treatment and again violates her ability to take control over her life, by potentially limiting the ways in which her life is changed or damaged by the assault, what the heck does that have to do with anything Christ taught -- or medical schools, either? 

The WAPO link that's the quote source is here:
http://www.washingto...

For activists seeking to understand what other legislative options have been explored in other states, here is a link to a summary of existing laws: http://www.ncsl.org/...  It says it's updated to fall of 2006, but I'm not sure that it is.

Illinois and California have been mentioned as two states that have taken steps to ensure that victims have access to timely treatment -- here's one statement on Illinois:

Illinois is building on an executive order by the Illinois Governor earlier this year that requires pharmacists to dispense emergency contraception upon request by customers.  This week, the state legislature approved a new rule requiring every pharmacy to post signs explaining to customers their right to receive any prescribed contraception, including a complaints hotline to encourage compliance.

The signs will also include information for people to sign up for the state drug coverage plan, I-SaveRx, which allows residents to order safe and affordable prescription refills from Canada and other countries where prices are lower than in the US due to better national regulation of drug prices. 




[ Parent ]
what bill? (0.00 / 0)
From the OP: "Let's push Democrats to get behind Senator Mary Ann Handle's (D-Manchester) bill that accomplishes this sensible goal."

Totally. And how do I do that?


 
1 user(s) logged on.
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Spotlight

Use the Spotlight tool to send a diary to offline journalists, with your feedback or suggestions.
(What is Spotlight?)


Search


   Advanced
My Left Nutmeg Feeds

Links


Connecticut's War Dead

Blogroll
Powered By
- SoapBlox

Connecticut Blogs
- Capitol Watch
- Colin McEnroe
- Connecticut2.com
- Connecticut Bob
- ConnecticutBlog
- CT Blue Blog
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CT Smart Growth
- CT Voices for Civil Justice
- CT Voters Count
- CT Weblogs
- CT Working Families Party
- CT Young Dems
- Cool Justice Report
- Democracy for CT
- Drinking Liberally (New Milford)
- East Haven Politics
- Emboldened
- Hat City Blog (Danbury)
- The Laurel
- LieberWatch
- NB Politicus (New Britain)
- New Haven Independent
- Nutmeg Grater
- Only In Bridgeport
- Political Capitol (Brian Lockhart)
- A Public Defender
- Rep. David McCluskey
- Rep. Tim O'Brien
- State Sen. Gary Lebeau
- Saramerica
- Stamford Talk
- Spazeboy
- The 40 Year Plan
- The Trough (Ted Mann: New London Day)
- Undercurrents (Hartford IMC)
- Wesleying
- Yale Democrats

CT Sites
- Clean Up CT
- CT Citizen Action Group
- CT Democratic Party
- CT For Lieberman Party
- CT General Assembly
- CT Secretary of State
- CT-N (Connecticut Network)
- Healthcare4every1.org
- Judith Blei Government Relations
- Love Makes A Family CT

CT Candidates
- Chris Murphy for Senate
- Susan Bysiewicz for Senate

- William Tong for Senate


Other State Blogs
- Alabama
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin



More blogs about connecticut+politics.
Technorati Blog Finder


 
Powered By
MLN is powered by SoapBlox
 
Powered by: SoapBlox