Support women’s health
Readers of The Times Record may not be aware of the recent attack by Republican leadership of the House of Representatives on health care for women. These “leaders” have voted to eliminate all federal funds for Planned Parenthood. Those who support this extreme legislative measure do not try to argue that it will save a single cent on the budget or create any jobs. Rather it will eliminate the jobs of health-care providers currently serving the women of Maine while disadvantaging Maine women.
Our representatives, Chellie Pingree and Mike Michaud, did not support the attack and voted against the measure.
What is at stake here for the women of Maine?
They will no longer have access to primary and preventive health care, breast and cervical cancer screening, annual exams, birth control, HIV testing, STI testing and treatment. The women who use the services of Planned Parenthood generally can not pay for these screenings and treatments on their own. In 2010 Planned Parenthood saw 11,600 patients here in Maine. Many of these women saw no other health-care provider last year.
There is still time to fight back. The legislation will shortly come before the U.S. Senate. We need Maine Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins to support women’s health as they have often in the past.
Please contact our senators and urge them to protect health care for Maine women by voting against the elimination of funding for Planned Parenthood.
The Challenge to a Woman’s Right to Chose and Women’s Health
If you are one of the majority of Californians who support a woman’s right to choose, the time is now to make your opinions known to your representatives. As we know the loss of reproductive freedom of choice will lead to an increase in children being raised in homes that are not prepared financially or emotionally to provide them with a healthy upbringing. The loss of access to birth control for the poor and more extremely a threat to birth control in general is an insult to the rights of humans to form responsible relationships within modern standards.
The Republican majority in the House of Representatives is mounting an effort to compromise the reproductive rights of women by eliminating federal funding for abortion by the introduction of HR 217. This bill is sponsored by Mike Penee R-Ind and is cosponsored by 147 other Republicans including Tom McClintock. HR-217- Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act amends Title X of the Public Health Service Act to prohibit family planning grants from being awarded to any entity that performs abortions. Planned Parenthood’s Heath centers are a prime target even though they do not perform abortions.
The Republican focus is double sided. They seek to both to eliminate government spending and to reduce the rights of women to seek abortions.
The provisions of HR 217 are:
1. the bill would allow public hospitals to refuse medically necessary abortions to pregnant women who are rushed in with life-threatening emergencies.
2. It would permanently deny abortion coverage to women who depend on the federal government for their health care, including Native Americans, federal employees, Peace Corps volunteers, poor women and women in federal prisons.
3. The proposal would prohibit anyone who receives a federal subsidy to buy insurance in the new health care exchanges from purchasing a plan that includes abortion coverage (i.e. reinstates the Stupak abortion coverage ban).
4. It would change tax laws in order to penalize businesses that offer abortion coverage and prevent women from deducting medical expenses related to abortion care.
The provisions of House Bill 3 are:
1. This bill would bar outright the use of federal subsidies to buy any insurance that covers abortion well beyond the new exchanges.
2. Tax credits that are encouraging small businesses to provide insurance for their workers could not be used to buy policies that cover abortions.
3. People with their own policies who have enough expenses to claim an income tax deduction could not deduct either the premiums for policies that cover abortion or the cost of an abortion.
4,People who use tax-preferred savings accounts to pay medical costs could not use the money to pay for a abortion without paying taxes on it.
5. It would make restrictions on federal funding for abortions that are now renewable every year permanent. It would allow federal financing of abortions which creates a new category of forcible rape which excludes statutory or coerced rape such as date rape. and in cases where a woman is in danger of death from her pregnancy but not serious health damage. It would free states from having to provide abortions in such emergency cases
The Battle against Roe v. Wade at the state level
In 2010 more that 600 measures were introduced to limit access to abortion and 34 secured passage.
29 governors are considered solidly anti abortion up from 21 before the election
In 15 states both the legislature and the governor are anti abortion compared with 10 last year.
87% of counties currently have no abortion providers
Current Supreme Court precedent restricts the governments ability to bar abortions prior to viability considered between 22 and 26 weeks. Nebraska has enacted a law last year that directly challenges this precedent and bans abortions after 20 weeks and includes a very narrow consideration for a woman’s life and physical health and lacks any exceptions for the discovery of severe fetal anomalies. Copycat laws are pending in other states.
CALIFORNIA IS DIFFERENT
1. A woman’s right to choose is ensconced in our constitution and statutes.
2. According to a Field Poll last July- 70% of all Californian’s support abortion rights as they are or want them further liberalized. 75% of independents favor making no changes to California law along with 40% of Republicans.
This attempt to turn back the rights of women for reproductive freedom and the rights of modern adults to form relationships with responsibility is an assault on the evolution of humanity. We are not animals that are destined to live at the whim of forces beyond our control but human beings that in order to mature, must take responsibility for the content of our lives.
Women’s Health adds nurse midwife
McDonough District Hospital is pleased to welcome Mary C. Thompson, Certified Nurse Midwife (CNM), as the newest member of the healthcare team for Women’s Health Center of Macomb, Inc. She joins Troy Eckman, MD; Sharie Harden, CNM; Brenda Powell-Allen, RNC, Women’s Health Nurse Practitioner (WHNP) and Sybil Mudloff, WHNP.
Their office is located in Health Services Building I on the MDH campus, 833-5959.
Thompson attended Carl Sandburg College in Galesburg where she received her Associate of Science in Nursing degree in 1990.
Thompson completed her Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree from Blessing-Reiman College of Nursing in Quincy in 2002.
She continued her education at Frontier School of Midwifery and Family Nursing in Hyden, Ky., completing her Master of Science in Nursing—Midwifery degree in 2010. Thompson worked at McDonough District Hospital in the Obstetrics Department as an LPN and RN for 27 years, where she also served as a Certified Lactation Consultant.
Thompson is a member of the Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing, the American College of Nurse Midwives (ACNM), and the Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric & Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN).
Thompson and her husband, Dale, have lived in Macomb for 20 years. They have three sons, Mark, Matthew, and Michael. In her spare time, Thompson enjoys walking, reading, knitting, and travelling.