Category: Contraception

Categories
Action Contraception Population Reproductive Health Women's Issues

Smash Amendment 62

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”
Bill of Rights, Constitution of the United States

Imagine this scenario. Anne, a young mother of three small children, recently noted low abdominal discomfort and bloating. She is horrified to learn that she may have ovarian cancer—but even more horrified to learn that the necessary surgery cannot be performed in Colorado.
If Amendment 62 passes it would make removing a diseased ovary illegal. Worse, a doctor who performs such a lifesaving surgery would be punished for murder!
Here is what the proposed Amendment 62 says: “Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of Article II of the state constitution, the term “person” shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.”
Anyone who graduated from an eighth grade health class knows that the start of the biological development is the human egg, and that girls are born with all the eggs that their ovaries will ever contain. So removing an ovary (even if diseased) would mean the removal of thousands of “persons”.
A woman whose doctorate is in biochemistry and is loosely associated with Georgetown University wrote this wording. An ethicist against abortion, what she has framed is so poorly defined that the above scenario is possible. A lawyer—or even a physician—could have done better!
This proposed amendment is laughable. It is unclear, it is unsupportable, it is misogyninistic and it would cost the state of Colorado millions of dollars to implement. Only the lawyers would profit if it is passed.
Let’s look at the problem of implementation. The word “person” appears in over 20,000 laws in our state. One current legal definition of “person” is “an autonomous being”. This foolish proposed amendment would certainly change that, since a fetus, embryo or egg are anything but autonomous! Passing the amendment would make major changes in the legal world, and would keep Colorado’s lawyers employed for years trying to figure out the ramifications.
You will remember that just two years ago a similar amendment was put forward. Proposed amendment 48 was a real loser! It lost in all Colorado counties. It lost by a huge margin—73 percent of voters were against it. Why did the Colorado Right to Life people do this again? Apparently they have received a message from God that this is their calling. This is clearly a case of infringement of our constitutional rights when one person’s religion interferes with the ability of another person to seek medical care. The proposed amendment would establish one set of religious beliefs as the law of the state. Doesn’t our Constitution’s Bill of Rights prohibit this?
The supporters of this proposed amendment don’t stop with facts. View their incredible misrepresentation of truth at: youtube.com/user/PersonhoodUSA.
Many of the same people who are against abortion are also against any contraception. They claim, against the judgment of most reputable scientists, that IUDs, emergency contraception and even “the pill” work by causing an abortion. If this crazy amendment were passed, all of these birth control methods might become unavailable in Colorado. Furthermore, miscarriages would have to be investigated (to be sure that the woman hadn’t caused the pregnancy loss intentionally), adding to the parents’ emotional pain.
Oh, what about abortion? There is no provision for cases of rape, incest or when a pregnancy endangers the mother’s life. This proposed amendment would make interrupting a pregnancy illegal—including saving the life of the mother! Even the strict “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops” allows interrupting an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy, because the pregnancy threatens a woman’s life. This would not be possible under Colorado’s proposed Amendment 62. Aborting a pregnancy for a woman who had been a victim of rape or of incest would also be punished as first-degree murder.
Proposed Amendment 62 is stupid. It is poorly written and therefore would tie up lawyers and the court system. If passed, 62 would endanger women’s health care. It would make it difficult for couples to plan their families, and the already high undesired pregnancy rate would skyrocket.
Please vote in this midterm election. And please vote NO on proposed Amendment 62. To do anything else would be irresponsible!

© Richard Grossman MD, 2010

This article may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org.

Categories
Action Contraception Family Planning Media Population Public Health Reproductive Health

Take the Next Step

It was an accident. In 1994 I spent a day with the political reporter, Robert Fisk, in Egypt. I had never heard of Fisk before, but the experience changed me.
We were part of a press tour organized by the Egyptian government to look at family planning clinics during the International Conference on Population and Development. Fisk inspired me to become an activist instead of just a doctor.
The tour started in a room crowded with real journalists. Although the Durango Herald provided me with the necessary credentials, I had little idea what a journalist actually did. Fisk told me about his experiences as a war correspondent. He has been in the middle of hostile fire in Bosnia and other hotspots. I remember his stories of reporters with less experience—and less luck—who were caught in crossfire and killed. “It’s a dangerous, lonely life,” he said in a recent interview. If I’m not wrong, Fisk himself has taken a few bullets. He could have been a professor of history, the field of his PhD. “You’ve got to feel the passion,” he exclaimed about his choice of career.
As a man who has experienced war personally, he comments: “War is primarily about the total failure of the human spirit. It is about death. Forget Hollywood.” Although British, Fisk has made his home in Beirut, Lebanon, for over 30 years. He told me that it had been a beautiful city before civil war tore it apart.
The tour showed just what I would expect to find in a developing country. In one women’s clinic I asked (through an interpreter) some of the women in the waiting room if they breastfed their babies. They looked at me as though I was from a different planet! “Of course our babies are breastfed! The Qur’an says that we should nurse for at least seven months.”
Although I had traveled to and practiced medicine in some rudimentary places, this clinic left strong memories. One was a woman arriving for her prenatal visit in beautiful clothes—by oxcart. The posters on the wall were similar to what we might see in this country, except for the Arabic script. There are many differences between our societies other than just the alphabet, however.
The clinic’s doctor spoke excellent English. During her years of service in that clinic she had done an informal survey of female genital mutilation. This cruel procedure is also known as “female circumcision,” and is performed in parts of northern Africa and of the Middle East. Usually a barber or other non-medical person does the cutting using unsterile instruments. The victims are children. FGM can lead to serious infections and even death. Survivors will enjoy sex less and may have serious problems during childbirth due to scarring. The doctor said that, of a hundred women she had asked, 98 had suffered this traumatic maiming.
Fisk put this visit into another perspective. He had been to Egypt many times before and had pushed the frontiers of freedom of speech. On one trip he explored the slums up in the hills surrounding Cairo. This huge city of 17 million people in the metro area has at least a million commuters who venture onto the crowded streets every day. Most commuters live in squalor in the poor areas surrounding the city. Fisk spent a day, he said, documenting people living in those miserable living conditions. Someone evidentially tipped off the officials that a stranger was snooping around, and the police exposed all of his film to the Egyptian sun.
Shortly after this experience in Cairo, I started working less so that I could do other things. Now I have time to write this newspaper column, teach a class at Fort Lewis College and be involved in leading a Quaker environmental group. Many friends in Durango have helped me step into this expanded role.
I now read the Independent of London, Fisk’s paper, online every day. His column on 9/11 reminded me of that accidental day in Egypt and how he inspired me to go beyond the usual role of a physician—to become an activist. The title of that article summarizes his viewpoint: “Nine years, two wars, hundreds of thousands dead – and nothing learnt.”
I am happy that I stepped out of my “comfort zone” sixteen years ago to learn more about family planning in Egypt. In addition, I accidentally learned about the risky life of a war journalist—and was propelled into being more of an activist.

This article may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org.