Categories
Population Public Health Women's Issues

Honor Girls–4-2011

I noted that Mrs. Lee was early in her third pregnancy when I was getting ready to see her in the office.

“How are you today?” I asked

“Very well, thank you. The morning sickness is getting better,” was her accented reply.

My examination showed that the size of her uterus was compatible with her 14 week gestational age and the fetal heart rate was average at 140 beats per minute. Then she had a question that I did not expect.

“How do I arrange an amniocentesis?” she asked.

Usually this procedure is done only if there is an increased risk of a genetic abnormality. It involves inserting a thin needle into the woman’s uterus to remove a tablespoon or so of the amniotic fluid that cushions the fetus. An amnio hurts a little bit and carries a small amount of risk of miscarriage.

“I don’t know why you should have an amnio. The blood test that could be done next week—the quad screen—is cheaper and without risk.”

“We already have two daughters and I want to see if this is a boy.”

Something clicked in my head. The Lees, being recent immigrants, wanted a son. “What would you do if you are carrying another daughter?” I asked.

“Well, we would have to think about it,” she answered evasively.

Many cultures favor males over females. In Hindu India, only a son is able to release a dead parent’s soul to go on its journey of reincarnation. Without a son to perform the ritual, the parent’s soul will be trapped forever in the corpse. Furthermore, since child mortality rates are very high in much of the developing world, it is safest to have two or three boys. Dowry is another motive. For a poor family a dowry can require a large proportion of the family’s wealth, making a girl child more of a liability than an asset.

When we traveled in China some fifteen years ago I photographed a beautiful tile picture, permanently imbedded in a wall at the railroad workers’ housing compound in Guangzhou. It showed a proud couple with the smiling father holding a baby up in the air. The child was obviously a girl, and no writing was needed to know the picture’s message. Although China hasn’t been very successful in convincing people to value girls as much as boys, South Korea has. Once females were treated inferiorly there, but now women have almost equal status with men. It is possible to change a society’s attitudes.

In some parts of the world one can pay for an ultrasound just to determine fetal gender. If female, it is likely that the mother will seek an abortion. Both India and China have outlawed these practices, but sex selection sonograms are still readily available.

Worse is what happens if a girl is born where female infanticide is still practiced. When a newborn is an undesired girl, she may be left outside to die. Even where femicide is not practiced, girls may be given short shrift. They may not be fed as well as their brothers, they are less likely to be taken for medical care when sick, and they are less likely than boys to go to school.

Without sex selection, more boys are born, but male infants are more likely to die than female. Overall, women live longer than men. Thus there should be more females alive than males, but sex selection has changed this. Males now exceed females worldwide by one percent.

In China there are 117 boys under age fifteen for every 100 girls. The ratio in India is slightly better at 113 to 100. Lots of young men will have difficulty finding wives!

The Chinese deal with their strong desire for a son in another way. Because of the limitations on most parents in China to raise only one child, many girls are abandoned to orphanages. They are usually well cared for there, but not all are able to go to school. Lucky American parents adopt a few of these Chinese children, who are almost all girls.

Back to my patient: should I do as Mrs. Lee asked?

“I will not do an amnio just to find out the fetus’s gender, without a medical reason,” I told her emphatically.

For many reasons we need to honor and empower girls, not select against them. One is that who girls are educated and have control over their lives will have smaller families when they grow up.

© Richard Grossman MD, 2011

Categories
Family Planning Population Reproductive Health Women's Issues

Watch this Legislation

Watch this Legislation—2-2011

© Richard Grossman MD, 2011

What is this country coming to? Even if you are not concerned about population issues, you should be concerned about various legislative actions that are gestating now. These bills, if they become law, will be serious steps backwards for the rights of half of our voting population—women.

If they were to become law, the infrastructure of health care for women (and for some men) would be destroyed. Many children will suffer, too.

The efforts at a federal level to restrict access to reproductive health care are in the “spending bill”, H.R. 1. During this economic downturn it makes sense to cut funding, but women and children seem to be getting the short stick.

The federal WIC program (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children) provides healthy food to pregnant women, their babies and children up to five years of age. Over six million children receive food through this program, as well as more than two million pregnant and breastfeeding women.

One of the strong points of WIC is that the program encourages women to breastfeed. Remember that nursing is healthier for the baby and for the mom, and that nursing also is an effective means of child spacing.

The proposed budget would cut more than a tenth of WIC funding. What will happen to those unfortunate mothers and their children if the WIC program is not available to them?

Another federal program, Title X (ten), provides family planning services to millions of women. It has become even more important since the economic downturn; the number of Americans without health insurance has risen to over 50 million! This program also pays for services such as cancer detection and the diagnosis and treatment of reproductive tract infections. From a purely financial standpoint it is well known that contraception pays for itself in the long run. Every dollar invested in family planning saves more than four dollars in obstetrical and pediatric services. Title X is one of the best programs to save the taxpayers’ money!

Nevertheless, some legislators are trying to take away all funding from Title X in H.R.1 and rwith H.R. 217. Apparently this is to remove support from Planned Parenthood, which administers much of the funding. Although Planned Parenthood does provide abortion care for many women, it carefully observes the laws that prevent using federal funds for abortions.

Furthermore, family planning services have been shown over and over to decrease the demand for abortion. If Title X is canceled there will be an increase in unplanned pregnancies and requests for abortion—just the opposite of what the antiabortion legislators (and you and I) want!

Earlier this month the House of Representatives passed the Pence amendment to H.R. 1 (the spending bill) aimed directly at Planned Parenthood. In addition to taking away Title X moneys, it will prevent any federal money from going to this organization. Fortunately, the Senate (with its Democratic majority) will probably prevent this bill from becoming law.

As a doctor who performs abortions, I take special note of South Dakota HB 1171. It is titled “An Act to expand the definition of justifiable homicide to provide for the protection of certain unborn children”. Just what the bill means, and how it will be interpreted if it becomes law, are uncertain. Perhaps the bill might as well be called the “The abortion doctor assassination authorization act”. Remember that the US Supreme Court declared abortion legal in 1973. Since that date the number of women suffering and dying from abortions has plummeted.

If this bill were to become law it is likely that the few doctors who do perform abortions in South Dakota will stop doing so. Where safe medical abortion services are not available, nonmedical people are ready to take over. Poorly trained people, without proper instruments or sterile technique, worked in the back alleys before 1973. Once again we will see victims of illegal abortionists in our hospitals and morgues.

There is other miserable legislation afoot, but these—H.R.1, the Pence Amendment and South Dakota HB 1171—are among the worst. Keep an eye on them, and let your legislators know that you still respect women and women’s right to have safe and legal abortions. A good source of information about bills before Congress is www.opencongress.org, which not only provides information but also makes it easy to email legislators.

Call our federal legislators and let them know what you think about these bills: Representative Scott Tipton—202.225-4761 Senator Mark Udall—970.247-1047 Senator Michael Bennet—970.259-1710