Tuesday, March 27, 2007

News Round-Up - 3/27/07

Visit Women's Health News at its new home - http://womenshealthnews.wordpress.com

Again with the thinking that women having knowledge is dangerous or scary or just plain bad.

Birth control prices going up on college campuses.

South Carolina wants to force women to look at ultrasounds before having an abortion. Thoughts on that at Aunt B's and in this previous post. Also, the underlying assumption that these silly women just haven't *thought* about it is especially offensive.

Ohio Governor to defund abstinence-only sex ed.

The American Medical Women's Association thinks women 30 and over should also be receiving the HPV vaccine, and has released a statement on cervical cancer prevention.

Anti-abortion folks are targeting urban, African-American women with their campaigns.

The CDC has adopted recommendations on HPV vaccination.

The Lactivist issues a World Breastfeeding Week Celebration Challenge, and dissects TSA breastfeeding policy.

Texas wants to pay women $500 to place babies for adoption rather than choosing abortion. Meanwhile, Surrogate Mothers, Inc. provides estimates of the average cost of having a surrogate mother (equivalent to what these TX women would be) ranging from $15,000-$50,000, depending on the method of fertiization. The Center for Surrogate Parenting website Experienced surrogate mothers will receive $23,000 - $30,000 as their compensation." $500 is about 2% of that $23K figure.

The Women's Bioethics Project blog has an interesting piece on "Bioethics Quilt Project: Black Americans and Medicine."

The Washington Post ran an article describing a woman's battle to get a second opinion on a breast imaging find. Kevin, MD points how how her efforts didn't really lead to better care and incurred unnecessary costs. I can see both points - the woman didn't really get the information or explanation she needed, but her efforts didn't ultimately improve her outcome.

(Hat tips to Feministing, the Kaiser Network, the Lactivist, et al)


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I suspect they didn't want to offer too much for the fear that some people might get pregnant on purpose to collect the money....
And same again next year.

Bluey Zarzof

7:37 PM  
Blogger Rachel said...

I tend to doubt that people would get pregnant just to collect $500. Aside from the general unpleasantness many women report during pregnancy, I can't image that $500 comes close to covering the cost of doctor visits and delivery, not to mention extra food, etc.

8:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rachel...that's why they only offered $500 people won't get pregnant on purpose to collect $500....you know you can get $2,000 for an egg...

Bluey Zarzof

11:38 PM  
Anonymous Rachel said...

I'm not disputing that they may have made it so low because they think people may get pregnant on purpose to collect the $500. I'm just not convinced that many women would actually find $500 a suitable incentive to go through a pregnancy if they had no intention of getting pregnant in the first place.
By the way, WHN is moving to WordPress, if you prefer to comment over there in the future.

7:22 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home