Feminists Critical of Decision to Appeal Plan B Ruling
Late Wednesday night, the Obama Administration filed an appeal in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals challenging a federal judge's decision that emergency contraception must be made available over the counter with no age restrictions. According to the New York Times, the Department of Justice will argue that Judge Edward Korman, who issued the ruling, did not have the authority to order the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to take a specific action and should have sent the case back to the FDA to decide what to do.
The announcement comes a day after the FDA approved new guidelines for the sale of emergency contraception, commonly known as Plan B, as part of an application by the pharmaceutical company Teva Women's Health. Under the approved guidelines, anyone purchasing Plan B must have proof of age, either a driver's license, passport, or birth certificate. The package will also be changed to include the statement "not for sale to those under 15 years of age *proof of age required* not for sale where age cannot be verified," and will include a security tag to prevent theft or sale without proper ID. Anyone who cannot prove their age will be denied the medication.
Nancy Northrup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights which filed the legal case against the FDA, issued a statement saying, "We are deeply disappointed that just days after President Obama proclaimed his commitment to women's reproductive rights, his administration has decided once again to deprive women of their right to obtain emergency contraception without unjustified and burdensome restrictions."
Her statements were echoed by many organizations in the reproductive rights movement. Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women, told reporters "The prevention of unwanted pregnancy, particularly in adolescents, should not be obstructed by politicians... President Obama should practice what he preaches." Ilyse Hogue of NARAL Pro-Choice America said in a statement, "Unfortunately, today's appeal reminds us that sometimes our leaders are out of step with the reality women face every day. We can only assume that HHS is signaling that they are satisfied with the status quo. That's simply unacceptable." Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, said "The decision to appeal and continue to put unnecessary, and for too many difficult, obstacles for obtaining Plan B flies in the face of medical and scientific evidence. We argue that IDs suppress the vote, this ID regulation blocks access to a desperately needed health care product and could even cost young girls and women their lives."
Many others were also outraged over the new guidelines. Jessica González-Rojas, executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice, said "Immigrant women and aspiring citizens of all ages have been hit particularly hard, since they are less likely to have government-issued identification... It's disappointing that the FDA decided to undermine the recent court victory for immigrant women and young Latinas by introducing more unnecessary obstacles to emergency contraception, which is safe and necessary."
Cythina Pearson, Executive Director of the National Women's Health Network, told Feminist Majority Foundation, "I'm disappointed that our government is still not treating women with the respect we deserve... A federal judge ordered the administration to drop the politics and do the right thing - remove the age limit on EC... But women will still have to show ID to the cashier. That's just plain unfair - and it will create a barrier for many women of all ages, who don't have government-issued ID."
"This is a disappointing step by the Administration because it still doesn't lift the barriers to access of emergency contraception to all who need it," Dr. Susan Wood, former FDA Assistant Commissioner for Women's Health, told Feminist Majority Foundation. "This action once again disregards the medical and scientific evidence, and leaves barriers to women who will still have to produce an ID to purchase Plan B. Unfortunately this means that this will go back to the courts to resolve the issue."
Media Resources: Associated Press 5/1/2013; CRR 5/1/2013; NARAL 5/1/2013; NYT 5/1/2013; Washington Post 5/1/2013; FDA 4/30/2013; NLIRJ 4/30/2013; Feminist Newswire 4/5/2013
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case.
UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall.
The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies.
Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .