Pope Benedict XVI Mocks Women's Reproductive Health

"Particularly disturbing is the crushing yoke of discrimination that women and girls so often endure, not to mention the unspeakable practice of sexual violence and exploitation which causes such humiliation and trauma," Benedict told an audience of government leaders and foreign diplomats in the late afternoon.

He also criticized what he called the "irony of those who promote abortion as a form of 'maternal' health care." The pope was referring to an African Union agreement signed by Angola and 44 other countries that abortion should be legal in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is endangered.

"How disconcerting the claim that the termination of life is a matter of reproductive health," Benedict said.

You know what's actually ironic? That the earthly representative of one of the many Sky Fairies and/or ETs people believe in is unable to grasp the concept that the uterine container is in fact a ZOMG!! human life.

And you know what's disconcerting? Permitting your Supreme Leader, the Pope (PBUH), to mock and belittle women's reproductive health care without condemnation.

In Our Country, We Do Sex, Too

And we'd also like to talk about it. Unfortunately, sex education is censored (or replaced with lies) by our most beloved leaders.

When it comes to sex education, let's hope India does a better job than we do:

NEW DELHI (AFP) - India's health minister on Wednesday lamented opposition from several states to a government plan to introduce sex education from next year, a report said.

"In our country, we do sex. But we don't want to talk about it and that is why we have a billion population," Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss said at an event to mark World Population Day.

"In our close-knit society, we have to enlighten and create awareness among our children," he was quoted as saying by the Press Trust of India.

The government has been fighting with around a dozen out of 29 states to introduce sex education in a bid to spread awareness of AIDS and condoms as well as family planning.

The Council of Boards of Education of India, which sets the teaching curriculum for schools, has prepared a package on sex education, according to a Times of India report earlier this year.

"We have recommended to make it a mandatory subject to be taught twice a week," Ramadoss said.

"They will be the losers if awareness is not created at the right age," the minister said of state opposing the plan.

Schools in the conservative nation, which ironically brought the world the Kama Sutra, have shied away from educating youngsters about such topics as human reproduction.

But the minister said education would not provoke promiscuity.

"We are not taking up sex education in a blatant manner, but in a subtle way," said Ramadoss. "We don't want to create controversy. But we have 55 per cent population that falls in the reproductive age and we have to create awareness among them."

Birth Control and Emergency Contraception In Oregon

Oregon politicians decide women should be able to receive adequate medical care:

With Gov. Ted Kulongoski's signature on a new piece of legislation, Oregon joined more than 20 other states in requiring coverage for contraceptives by employee health insurance plans. The new law, which will go into effect Jan. 1, 2008, exempts certain religious employers from the requirement. The law also requires hospitals to inform victims of sexual assault about the availability of emergency contraception and requires hospital staff to provide it upon request. “This fight is fundamentally about women being able to make the best health care decisions for themselves and their families,” Gov. Kulongosk, a Democrat, said in a statement. “With the signing of this bill into law, we continue our ongoing work to expand personal freedom and offer women full equality in our society.”

Good for Oregon, and a step in the right direction. Now, how long until politicians realize that, just because the patients are female, they have no business legislating patients' health care decisions?

Your Doctor Owns You

If you're a female patient of reproductive age and you hope to receive adequate care, that is.

Allow me to illustrate.

Patient #1

Breech presentation [feet first]; to convert to vertex [head first], in order to avoid a C/S and attempt a vaginal delivery, an external cephalic version is indicated.

"Doctor, I'd like to try a vaginal delivery ," the patient tells me. "No," I reply. "I can't do that. It's against my religion."

I can get away with refusing to provide adequate care because, for female patients of reproductive age, the applicable standard of care is What You Feel In Your Heart (TM)*. If you feel in your heart an action would cause harm to somebody—born or unborn—it's legitimate to decline to participate [in rendering proper care].

*[As I'm sure you're aware, What You Feel In Your Heart (TM) is not just a basic medical principle. It's also a fundamental legal principle. One recognized and respected by malpractice attorneys and juries everywhere.]

Also, keep in mind that any patient encounter is, ultimately, all about me, the physician. It's about my rights as an individual, about my constitutional right to freedom of religion. I'm not trying to deny anybody access to treatment. I'm saying, "Don't bother me with your silly medical concerns. Don't make your choice my choice."

Patient #2

Asks for some pain relief during labor. That's when I inform her that I'm a Scientologist and that pain relief for pregnant women is against my religion. Five minutes of verbal sparring later ['cause what would providing medical care be without the patient having to beg and plead for it just a tad], I relent with an order for pain meds—but only after the patient tells me she needs pain control for a toothache, not to ease labor.

"This is about the rights of the individual, about our constitutional right to freedom of religion," says Frank Manion, an attorney with the American Center for Law and Justice, a legal group in Washington, D.C. Founded by minister Pat Robertson....

I told you so! Patient encounters involving female patients of reproductive age are not about medicine and rendering care. They're about the doctor's rights as an individual and, of course, religion.

Patient #3

Comes in for a routine physical. "So, your husband is in agreement with your decision to come in today on your own, unaccompanied?"

"I'm not married," the patient tells me.

"You're not?" I calmly put down my pen. "Then I'm not comfortable continuing this exam."

Later, I explain that "My decision to not perform a routine physical and to refer the patient was not because she was unmarried; rather, it was based on my moral belief that a woman should not be allowed in public unaccompanied by a husband or a male relative." I add "Such religious beliefs are a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."

In the end, all the women I mentioned were able to get the treatment they wanted, even if they had to go elsewhere. So one could see my refusal to render adequate medical care as a mere inconvenience. "In 99.9 percent of these cases, the patients walk away with what they came for, and everyone's satisfied," Manion asserts. "I know there's the horror story of the lonely person in the middle of nowhere who meets one of my clients. But those cases are so rare."

Mr. Manion couldn't be more right if a Sky Fairy lodged itself in his ear canal and told him what to say.

That is, he's right when you consider that the standard isn't the patient receiving appropriate medical care, but rather her receiving care at some point, somewhere, somehow, by somebody, fingers crossed she has adequate resources and know-how to arrange for alternate care, and pray to [insert deity of choice here] she's part of an imaginary 99.9 percent of cases who do manage to get proper medical care.

Now if this standard doesn't fill you, the patient and your loved ones, with satisfaction, I don't know what will.

But wait; there's more!

If there's one thing both sides can agree on, it's this: In an emergency, doctors need to put aside personal beliefs to do what's best for the patient. But in a world guided by religious directives, even this can be a slippery proposition.

"I was told I could not admit her [14 weeks pregnant with ruptured membranes] unless there was a risk to her life," Dr. Goldner remembers. "They [the nearby Catholic Medical Center] said, 'Why don't you wait until she has an infection or she gets a fever?' They were asking me to do something other than the standard of care. They wanted me to put her health in jeopardy."

Turns out, the definition of emergency depends on whom you ask. Dr. Christiansen, the pro-life ob/gyn, says she would not object to either method [medical or surgical] of ending an ectopic pregnancy. "I do feel that the one indication for abortion is to save the mother's life—that's clear in my mind," she says. "But the reality is, the vast majority of abortions are elective. There are very, very few instances where the mother's life is truly in jeopardy."

I dare you to challenge Dr. Christiansen's statement. Let me save you some time; you cannot.

As long as it's acceptable in this country to debate and set policy based on the premise that, if a patient is female, she may only receive care if, and only if, her life is in danger, you don't have a leg to stand on [chances are, quite literally if you're female and your condition isn't deemed life threating enough to operate and save said leg].

As things stand now, the Drs. Christiansen of the world, your neighbors, politicians, and complete strangers get to decide how close to the brink of death you may be permitted to get, before you're allowed to receive adequate medical care.

So, to sum up, if you're a female patient of reproductive age:

1. Medical decision: Based on what your doctor feels in his/her heart, not science.

2. Doctor's visit: Not about you and your medical problem; rather, about religion. [The doctor's, of course, you silly goose.]

3. Treatment: It's not about receiving adequate medical care. It's about receiving something, at some point, somehow, somewhere. [Kinda like magic, really. Do-it-yourself magic.]

4. Indication for treatment: If, and only if, your life is in danger.

Here's.To.Your.Health!

UPDATE: #1 Dinosaur has more.

Ovarian Tissue Transplant

Belgian doctors report the first ever pregnancy in a 25-year-old woman who underwent autologous (her own) ovarian tissue transplant:

Professor Jacques Donnez and his team "have managed to achieve what no other team in the world has yet been able to do - given a young woman, who underwent cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to treatment, the gift of pregnancy," the university hospital said in a statement.

The ovarian tissue was removed and cryopreserved (frozen) before she had chemotherapy for Hodgkin's lymphoma. Then the tissue was transplanted back into her body and, after four months, it was fully functional (maturing and releasing eggs). The child was conceived naturally and the woman is now 25 weeks pregnant. (The usual transplant location is under the skin of the abdomen.)

This is not the first time embryos have been produced from transplanted ovarian tissue:

In March this year, Dr. Otkay [a fertility expert at Cornell University] reported the production of an embryo from an autologous heterotopic ovarian tissue transplant. In that case the woman failed to become pregnant.

Very good news, indeed, for reproductive age women who have to undergo cancer treatment. Also good news on the horizon for women who experience other types of reproductive problems: in mice, the ovary appears to produce eggs throughout the female's life; on-going efforts aim to perfect the techniques used for the first human uterine transplant; and postmenopausal women can carry a pregnancy to term (the oldest woman to give birth is a 63-year-old Californian).

At the same time, from an illuminating interview at feministing.com, we find out that Alexander Sanger, Chair of the International Planned Parenthood Council doubts the safety of the combined oral contraceptive pill. It's not a good day when even the FDA (lately, not the most scientifically-driven body when it comes to women's reproductive health) contradicts such a prominent figure as Mr. Sanger. According to the FDA:

In fact, over the years, more studies have been done on the pill to look for serious side effects than have been done on any other medicine in history [.]

One of these days I will get around to telling you the saga of the IUD (the intrauterine device or, as I like to call it, the Cinderella of American birth control). And while we're on the subject, allow me to be the first to nominate the IUD as the "poster-child/method" of what happens when women can't make beneficial health decisions because of lack of information and massive amounts of misinformation.

Government Removes Women's Health Information

It appears that accurate women's health information on government sites has been quietly disappearing (via feministing.com).

My first reaction was to write a post about my outrage and disappointment at this news. But you know what, never mind that. Why waste time and energy stating the obvious. Instead, I can do something more constructive--post a list of useful sites with women's health information. As it happens, I'm compiling just such a list for my book, so I have a ton of good links:

Professional Medical Associations

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG)

American Medical Women's Association (AMWA)

Association of Reproductive Health Professionals (ARHP)

Faculty of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care

National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women's Health (NPWH)

American Academy of Family Physicians

American College of Physicians - Internal Medicine - Doctors for Adults

American Psychiatric Association

American Medical Association Home Page (AMA)

The National Medical Association

Non-Governmental Organizations

Planned Parenthood Federation of America

International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF)

Marie Stopes International

The Alan Guttmacher Institute

National Women's Health Resource Center (NWHRC)

Black Women's Health Imperative

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

So, there you have it. Some useful links, and I'll post more soon. If this type of data will no longer be available on government sites, no problem. It will be available here!