Bush administration considers crackdown on contraception

This is pretty radical, even by Bush administration standards.

Family planning groups and at least one member of Congress objected on Tuesday to a Bush administration memo that defines several widely used contraception methods as abortion and protects the right of medical providers to refuse to offer them.

The proposal would cut off federal funds to hospitals and states that attempt to compel medical providers to offer legal abortion and contraception services to women.

The proposal circulated to media defines abortion broadly to include many types of contraception, including birth control pills and intrauterine devices.

Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said, “This proposed rule will put women’s access to birth control and the information they need to make health care decisions at risk. The proposed rule will radically redefine abortion to include some of the most common and effective methods of birth control. As a result, women’s ability to manage their own health care is at risk of being compromised by politics and ideology.”

Quite right. According to the HHS draft, “abortion” takes on a very broad meaning: “The Department proposes to define abortion as ‘any of the various procedures — including the prescription and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.'”

That necessarily means that common birth-control methods — including the birth control pill and IUDs — would be designated as “abortion.”

The proposed rule is specifically designed to counter recent state laws enacted to ensure that women can get contraception when they want or need it.

“Despite the fact that several conscience statutes protecting health care entities from discrimination have been in existence for decades, recent events suggest the public and people in the health care industry are largely uninformed of the protections,” the draft reads.

“In May 2007, Connecticut passed a law requiring all hospitals to distribute Plan B to rape victims, despite religious organizations’ objections to the abortifacient nature of the drug,” it adds.

New York Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) explained in a statement, “Federal law currently protects individuals who prefer not to provide abortion services…. This draft regulation would significantly expand the definition of abortion to include birth control for the purpose of conscience clause exemptions. By trumping state laws that guarantee women’s access to prescription contraceptives, this policy would encourage health care institutions seeking to limit access to birth control.”

RH Reality Check has more background on this.

And at the risk of tying literally every story to the presidential campaign, it’s probably worth noting that the Bush administration’s consideration of this new policy comes just a week after John McCain became visibly uncomfortable when asked to explain his votes against insurance coverage of birth control. It’s also a reminder that this Bush administration memo is consistent with McCain’s opposition to contraception in general.

And the irony of this is that by denying birth control, the administration will increase the number of true abortions. It’s confoundingly stupid, but not surprising.

  • This is what the last six months of the administration will be for–trying to shove through stuff like this.

    And Mary and the other PUMAs will still vote for John McCain because Barack Obama just has to be punished for winning over Hillary Clinton. Thanks, girls–your daughters and granddaughters appreciate your twisted, thoroughly craven legacy.

  • Women seeking to access reproductive health care are already limited. The right has been successful at cutting away legal reproductive health services for years now. And that’s what makes me crazy. Abortion is legal. Contraception is legal. Discussing options and offering medical advice that includes mentioning abortion and contraceptives is legal. And if you work in a public hospital or health care center it is YOUR JOB to include those options when working with patients.

    That you can opt out for moral reasons is absurd.

  • I can’t verify with fact, but my hunch is that the majority of women that do get abortions in a legal and safe place can afford the procedure, and are most likely republican/conservative. Just a hunch.

    Also, I think the real reason the right is so fanatical about this issue is they’re scared to death about white’s eventually becoming a minority. They see abortion as a self imposed genocide of the white race.

    I will bet every last dollar I have that they would outlaw abortions for whites, but allow brown people to abort away.

    Simplistic yes, but who said the right was complicated?

  • “termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation”

    So it’s a human life even before implantation?
    And killing it is murder?
    Then we’ve got a lot of fertility clinics routinely committing murder.

    Where’s the outraged ideological consistency?

  • They see abortion as a self imposed genocide of the white race.

    Nah, they are just anti-sex — St. Augustine may have been the first Republican. They want to frighten the knees of American womanhood together.

    If it were purely racial, they’d make government subsidies available for abortion to minority low-income women. If you can’t raise the bridge (increase the white birth rate), you lower the water.

  • Let’s hope Recession appointmentand change of law will not be used for this legislation. It should not even be brought to the floor for discussion until, 1.22.09 or not at all.

    The last thing I want in my life is some war mongering, lying , deceitful, sex crazed , filled with corruption Republican telling me what to do.

  • Ok that’s it. I’m giving up sex with men. I’ll stop by my local adult shop and get a three dimensional sex toy. And get a dog for the companionship.

    Maybe when no one is getting laid properly anymore the government will come to their senses if only out of sheer frustration.

    Or better yet, lots of heavy petting but no release.

    Ladies!! Join me for the Blue Ball Revolution!!!

  • President Obama would reverse this idiotic Bush policy. Would President McCain?

    Unfortunately, the next six months is a very long time in the course of a pregnancy.

    A bad case like this makes the only sensible argument I have ever heard in opposition to a universal single-payer plan for medical insurance. If, God forbid, America ever elects another president as evil and stupid as Bush, he (or she) might decide to eliminate “government” payments for medical procedures (s)he finds objectionable – like contraception.

    For now, most Medicare patients (mostly over age 65) won’t be affected by the Bush policy on contraception. 🙂

  • Wow, I was wondering how long it would be till they went after Griswold as well as Roe. We’re back in the days of Margaret Sanger being sent to prison for speaking in favor of birth control.

    Every time you think you can’t imagine that these fascist scum could be more outrageous, they come along the next day and prove how pitiful your imagination is.

  • Oh come on … what we are really dealing with here are the “Orgasm Police”: Nobody should be allowed to have any unauthorized orgasms, and certainly not for pleasure! Only for procreation! Never for Recreation! It’s these heathens who cannot control their primal urges who are destroying our society, don’t ya know. That’s what makes gays and lesbians bad … they never have the proper kinds of orgasms. Any time a woman is close to enjoying sex, she is striding over the precipice to hell. Men, of course, don’t need the same kind of scrutiny.

    It’s so wonderful to have the “truly moral” looking out for the rest of us. Somehow they get a bit slack about war and torture and starvation and pollution, but they’re busy with orgasm oversight so cut them some slack.

  • What about all the guys who “commit abortion” when they spank their monkey?

    Oh, I forgot, in Theocratic Fascist World, it’s the women who have to be controlled, not the tenthwitted bozos. of course, most Fundie men need to spank the monkey since they could ever get close to a woman or know what to do if they did.

  • under these guidelines, masturbation must equal genocide. To proclaim otherwise is hypocritical.
    don’t even think about unprotected sex that doesn’t result in fertilization.

  • LiberalWacko,

    Let me add that I think they want to regulate sex for the public. I’m sure they, their daughters, wifes, and the men they pick up in restrooms can do whatever they want.

  • ml johnson – your statement: “The last thing I want in my life is some war mongering, lying , deceitful, sex crazed , filled with corruption Republican…” is the most redundant phrase that I have ever seen.

  • Maybe I’m missing something but…. Don’t birth control pills prevent conception?
    If conception never happens, how can it be abortion?

  • Ladies!! Join me for the Blue Ball Revolution!!!

    I’d do a lot for my country, but I draw the line there.

  • My 14-year-old daughter is on birth control because of ovarian cysts, a recurring problem that was serious enough to require emergency surgery in January.

    I’m just sayin’…

  • So, to the right wing orgasm police, a little hand to gland combat is genocide…
    Jeez…

  • Don’t birth control pills prevent conception? If conception never happens, how can it be abortion?

    Some studies suggest that some types of BC pills may prevent implantation rather than conception. This may also be how some types of emergency contraception (mifepristone or RU-486, and the “morning-after pill,” which is often just regular pills taken in larger doses) work. The majority of reputable studies show that emergency contraception prevents conception, not implantation, but anti-reproductive choice forces have been arguing for years that it’s implantation that’s halted.

    Anti-Griswold types have been going after these things for years, thus the struggle against FDA approval of RU-486 and against over-the-counter sales of morning-after pills. This is just the latest battle in that fight.

  • Looks like they’re either trying to lose the election for McCain or they’re giving him a side of an issue to butt up against to show how just how much he’s not like Bush.

  • Some studies suggest that some types of BC pills may prevent implantation rather than conception.

    Right. From the Reuters article: “Conception occurs when egg and sperm unite in the fallopian tubes. It takes three to four days before the fertilized egg implants in the uterus. Several birth control methods interfere with this, including the birth control pill and IUDs.”

  • I first posted this reply on Broadsheet on Salon.com, and think it is relevant here:
    “Seems that to refuse to have sex is to refuse to fertilize a viable fetus-in-waiting. Perhaps any woman who is fertile should be looking for a sperm donor to bring to life that soul living in her egg. To allow that egg to just be wasted is the sin of omission, an abomination to God. Come on, girls, get with the program. You may not take a life in your selfishness to have a life.”

    Additionally, I have asked this question many times with no responses: How do people with none, or only one or two children, George & Laura (one pregnancy-twins), Lynne & Dick(two, I think), Condoleezza (0)[we don’t know her sexual orientation], Rove (does he have any? Is he married?), etc. manage to “limit” their family’s size? How many unfertilized eggs have gone wasting, and how was pregnancy avoided? I’d love to hear the explanations for this. I suspect that most of the people to whom I refer have used one of the cited “abortion” practices that are now being prohibited from coverage.

    Anyone want to provide statistics and statements by these moral bastions of Truth?

    peace,

    st john

  • amy said:
    Ok that’s it. I’m giving up sex with men. I’ll stop by my local adult shop and get a three dimensional sex toy. And get a dog for the companionship.

    Okay, not even I am tasteless enough to conflate those two acquisitions.

    Or am I?

  • When will women learn that they were meant to remain barefoot and pregnant. This has gone too far already with women trying to take men’s jobs and deciding they have the right to make decisions about their own bodies. Women need to just shut up (f**king C**ts) and do what men tell them to do. God made them subservient to men and they need to remember their place…my friends

  • And the irony of this is that by denying birth control, the administration will increase the number of true abortions. It’s confoundingly stupid, but not surprising.

    They want more abortions. Without them, what would they have to rail about?

  • Right. From the Reuters article…

    Sorry, Steve; didn’t see that in the Reuters piece. This is, of course, karma for me telling JRD to read your poll post!

    I don’t think this is quite accurate of Reuters, though: “Several birth control methods interfere with this, including the birth control pill and IUDs.” IUDs, yes, but my understanding is that most types of BC pills prevent ovulation. Perhaps someone better versed in this can jump in.

  • Ya know it doesn’t matter WHEN the birth control works, as long as it is in time. Angels and pinheads.

  • Wow, I was wondering how long it would be till they went after Griswold as well as Roe.

    I’ve been expecting it, too. I think it’s actually good news. A party willing to go on record trying to outlaw contraception is a party that will completely alienate the youngest voting cohorts. Bear in mind that once a young voter has voted for a particular party 2-3 times, they don’t often switch. So taking this stand will help ensure the minority status of the GOP for decades to come.

  • Redundancy:
    How do the “leaders” on this issue manage their own family size? What “birth control” techniques do they use? Pharmaceuticals, condoms, spermacide(killing sperm is OK?), IUDs(kind of sounds like IED), diaphragm, total abstinence, rhythm, sterilization(vasectomy or tubal ligation, hysterectomy), and, of course, abortion. I’d like to know who uses what method and how it is justified. Any answers?

    I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transormation
    peace,
    st john

  • Who exactly are these people opposing birth control? Since the usual size of a family is 2-3 children, even most Republicans are most likely using birth control. If they didn’t, they would all need large vans to tote around their army of children. I guess its more of a “do as I say, not as I do” situation. Its only going to affect the people who can’t afford to go to another doctor to get their birth control. Funny that because of this the people with the fewest resources are the ones who will end up having more children that they can’t support.

  • What’s the matter with you whiners?

    EVERYONE knows that old white males should have the final say over a woman’s reproductive choices!

    If I can’t have Hillary, I want McCain & the hell with women, the hell with the party, the hell with the country, and the hell with the world. WWIII – we lust for thee – go McBush…

  • My understanding is that most BC pills taken in the usual protocols prevent ovulation; however, taken in different combinations (as prescribed for decades in college health clinics, and well known in general ) those same pills are what make up what is marketed as Plan B, and that does, in my understanding, prevent implantation.

    (For # 6 above: Ethically, if you believe life begins at conception, then life begins before implantation.)

    About top dog Republicans, their progeny and what one would rather not think about, their sex practices (yeeesh!): I read (years ago) that Laura and George were not lucky on the producing front and may not have been able to have more; Lynne and Dickie — even with three, they must have done SOMETHING not to have more; Condi — a conundrum; Rove, I have read, is married and has, I think, a son. McCain: three by his first wife, very fast and then he was off to war, at least two biologically by his second — he didn’t use a whole LOT of b.c., but he and #2 must have used SOME unless there’s a med. reason or he had a vasectomy, which seems unlikely given his hotdog psychology, but you never know.

    But we miss the point here, thinking that a possible contradiction between what Republicans say and what they do matters. In a real democracy, yes, but for this crowd, men (and their designated consorts) are above the law. Any law they want to use to oppress and control the rest of us does not apply to them, because they are in every instance, at will, at whim, above it. They are busy, as Greenwald so brilliantly explained in the last day or so, making sure that we have a country in which men (the chosen men) are above the law. Period.

  • The ‘right to lifers’ real goal all along has been Griswold vs Connecticutt. Without Griswold, there is no Roe.

    The RightWing will tell you that Griswold is where the Supremes ‘created’ the ‘right to privacy’ that is the foundation for Roe Vs Wade. If Griswold is overturned (a real possibility with 1 or 2 more Scalia/Roberts/Thomas types on the court), then you & I will no longer have any constitutionally founded ‘right to privacy’!

    The basis of the Griswold law suit was that the state of Connecticutt was having investigators looking into persons windows at night to see if they were using contraceptives. Griswold was arrested for violating the law by using contraceptives – determined to be doing so by government peeping-toms. Think about it being ‘legal’ for governments to window-peep on your home and arrest you for using contraceptives!

  • The actual rule is couched in terms of protecting religious freedom. It states that a hospital can’t fire an person who refuses to provide patients with information or proscriptions related to abortion (with its newly broadend defintion) on religious grounds.

    I personnally would love it if I could object to certain parts of my job on religious grounds and not be fired.

    “Sorry boss I can’t use excel, the Lord says it is evil.”

  • Quick clarifications:

    Mifepristone/RU-486 is not emergency contraception. It is a medication inducing abortion. Indeed, it is an abortifacient.

    Different from the morning-after pill (aka emergency contraception), which within MEDICAL definitions of pregnancy etc., sigh, does only prevent implantation and is thus, medically speaking, not an abortifacient. IUDs can also be used as EC by being inserted soon after unprotected sex. Medically speaking, also not an abortifacient. Of course that does not stop the Bushies, but whatever.

    The birth-control pill is intended to prevent both ovulation and implementation. However, it is unclear whether it MIGHT allow fertilization but not implantation to occur. For some reason, since it cannot be proven that it actually prevents implantation of fertilized ova, the Bushies have seized on this because they think “prevents implantation” = “abortifacient.” Again, medically, this is not true. False. Not factual.

    Not that that ever stopped them.

    It’s all about moving the frame. I recommend this post re moving the frame:
    http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/07/third-way_06.html

  • Ha, that should be implantation, above, not implementation. I’m at work, can you tell?

  • Yes, thanks, Laura, and excellent ‘splanation, especially this:

    For some reason, since it cannot be proven that it actually prevents implantation of fertilized ova, the Bushies have seized on this because they think “prevents implantation” = “abortifacient.”

  • Has no one ever noticed how the rightwing religious nuts are all alike. Here we have the Bushies regulating contraception. In Iran and Saudi Arabia we have the morality police regulating who can walk together in the streets and what they wear. This isn’t the first time I’ve noticed a distinct resemblance between James Dobson and Osama bin Laden.

  • Has no one ever noticed how the rightwing religious nuts are all alike? Here we have the Bushies regulating contraception. In Iran and Saudi Arabia we have the morality police regulating who can walk together in the streets and what they wear. This isn’t the first time I’ve noticed a distinct resemblance between James Dobson and Osama bin Laden.

  • I simply cannot comprehend the stupidity of these people. Medically speaking, there is no way to tell if an egg has been fertilized or not until it implants. An egg can be fertilized and still not implant, but get flushed out of the body, even without the aid of the hormonal contraception which prevents implantation. Fertility clinic doctors don’t tell a woman “Congratulations, you’re pregnant!” until implantation has been a success. A fertilized egg floating around a Fallopian tub doesn’t mean jack. This is why doctors have been trying to define conception as implantation and not simply fertilization.

    Oh wait, I forgot, fundietards reject science as the working of the devil. Facts are irrelevant. Sorry.

    Moments like this make me feel relieved that I’m a lesbian and have next to no worry about unintended pregnancies. Then I remember how the government treats me for that and I feel worthless again.

  • A party willing to go on record trying to outlaw contraception […] — JimBOB, @30

    Ah, but *were* they willing to go on record with it, especially before the elections? The thing is still in the internal memo stage. Now that it came to light, it’s most unlikely to make it into a bill and, subsequently, into a law, because everyone will be on the lookout for it (one hopes). But, if it hadn’t come to light this early…

    Nothing simpler than to slip it into some other, possibly unrelated, bill. The bigger the bill, the better the chances that nobody will even notice the little worm in the apple, since there seems to be a tradition in the Congress of not reading — or not reading *carefully* — the bills they’re asked to vote on. I dare say, among the cognoscenti (Repubs), an additional distraction could be managed for the Dems to fratch about, making sure they don’t notice that particular addition.

    So the bill goes through the vote, Bush signs it and — presto chango — we have a new law which chips away further at the reproductive rights of women, without the public being any the wiser. Or, at least, not knowing anything abut it till the first case comes up in court disputing it — long after the elections.

  • Have you all noticed how Bush is putting all the wacko stuff out there before McCain has to? Just saying…

    Also, I’m wondering, just wondering, if some of the cronies happen to be corporations who make pills that prevent ovulation rather than pills that prevent implantation…or am I just becoming cynical and paranoid at the same time?

  • I support the religious freedom of health professionals.

    That said, a disclaimer pasted on the front door of every health care provider should list all procedures which will NOT be provided for whatever reason. (religious, moral, philosophical, pet medical theories, orders from the mothership, etc.)

    You have the right to be nuts. But the patients have a right to know just how nuts you are. Medical options are withheld all the time and not just for religious reasons.

    I suspect it’s impossible to make a living imposing your religious values on your clients. When people want that, they’ll go to church, not the clinic. Disclosure will solve this problem.

  • The birth control pill prevents the body from ovulating, therefore no conception can occur. The IUD prevents a fertilized egg from implanting, hence would be abortive according to the logic of the Bush administration.

    But not the Pill.

  • Comments are closed.