Reproductive Justice and New Jersey

This blog will focus on reproductive justice issues in the state of New Jersey, and beyond. The term reproductive justice was coined by women of color, specifically the amazing women from SisterSong. The term is meant to be an expansion of the reproductive rights paradigm which focuses on the issues of birth control and abortion rights.
Reproductive Justice uses the experiences of women of color as the point of entry to discuss issues of reproductive rights and health. This shift in center more clearly puts into focus the ways that the interrelated systems of race, class, gender, and sexual orientation work to limit women's ability to gain and maintain control of their reproductive lives.
The reproductive justice framework facilitates a more nuanced discussion of issues such as access to abortion, health care, birthing, the right to reproductive health, eugenics, population control, and the many reproductive technologies that exist. I have great respect for the women who claimed the term Reproductive Justice and use it with care, especially as a white woman who has worked hard to understand the ways white privilege has affected her life and choices.

I look forward to an open dialogue about important issues in our community, and welcome comments both critical and affirming.


Friday, February 11, 2011

Sample Letter to Congress



Dear Readers,

Here is a sample letter you can send to Congress to oppose the dirge of anti-women legislation currently in the house!


Dear Congressperson:

I am gravely concerned over the attack on women’s health that is occurring in the House of Representatives.

New leadership has proposed completely eliminating all Title X funding and HR 217, which would deny Title X funding to women’s health providers. These funds allow community health centers to provide crucial services like birth control and pap tests and cancer screenings to millions of women and families each year. Without that funding and without those health centers, women and families across the country will no longer receive critical health care.

HR 3 has been introduced and would ban private insurance coverage for abortion for millions of women. It would go so far as to raise taxes for people and small businesses that purchase this coverage with their own money. The true intent of this bill is to end insurance coverage for virtually all abortions, including private insurance that Americans pay for with their own money. HR 3 creates an alarming new definition of what constitutes “federal funding.” The unprecedented step of defining “federal funding” to include tax exemptions or other tax expenditures could threaten a wide array of other activities.


HR 358 Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) to prohibit federal  funds from being used to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion services. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that as many as one in four women enrolled in Medicaid who wants to have an abortion is forced to continue her pregnancy because she cannot afford the procedure Because of poverty in the United States, the denial of federal funding affects women of color most heavily. 


United States policy must safeguard a woman's health, regardless of how she receives her health insurance.  Additionally, the idea that these bills will strengthen our economy is misleading. Americans want Congress to create jobs and strengthen our economy, not to argue over new ways to restrict reproductive health. The discussion should be about reproductive health measures that would save money and help our economy, such as fully covering family planning under our new health care laws.

I stand against the continuing resolution to zero out funding for Title X. I stand against HR 217, which would leave women without a trusted place to get important care. I stand against HR 3, which unfairly punishes a woman for carrying comprehensive health insurance and I stand against HR 358 which will disproportionately affect poor women and women of color. Stop bans on abortion coverage --They are misleading, unfair and dangerousWomen’s healthcare, including abortion, must be accessible for all women.

Sincerely,



Signature


Print Name


Address                                                            City                                          State           Zip code

Thursday, February 10, 2011

The Attack on Women

There are a number of legislative bills currently in the house the will gravely affect women's access and right to abortion.  Here are the current issues for advocacy both Nationally and Locally:


NATIONALLY

Bill HR3
Sponsor: Rep Smith, Christopher (NJ-4).

“No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”
Prohibits the expenditure of funds authorized or appropriated by federal law or funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by federal law for any abortions.

Prohibits federal funds from being used for any health benefits coverage the includes coverage of abortion. (Currently, federal funds cannot be used for abortion services and plans receiving federal funds must keep federal funds segregated from any funds for abortion services.)

Does not allow tax benefits for amounts paid or incurred for an abortion, or for a health benefits plan that includes coverage of abortions, including any medical deduction for such amounts or any credit for such an employer-sponsored plan.

Until February 3, 2011 the bill had language that said only victims of “forcible rape” could access abortion services with federal dollars.

Kermit Gosnell: Women’s Medical Society

Gosnell charged with multiple counts of murder in the deaths of one woman and seven newborn babies. He ran a clinic with unclean and inhumane conditions, with untrained and unqualified staff. Primarily poor women utilized his services.

This can be tied to restrictions on abortion: “The more restrictive and stigmatized abortion becomes, the more women will suffer the indignities of clinics … The direct result of our abortion policy is that the most vulnerable women will have to risk their health and lives to get what should be a completely safe and common procedure.”
-Carol E. Tracy, Women’s Law Project

New Jersey

Governor Christie Vetoed Women’s Health Bill

(A3273), would have directed the state to apply to the federal government to expand its Medicaid program to include women earning as much as twice the poverty rate -- $29,140 for a family of two -- to provide birth control, cervical exams and other family planning services. Abortions would not be paid with this money, sponsors said.

Governor Christie has also completely eliminated funding for family planning agencies. Last year, this budget line allocated over $7 million for basic reproductive health care services, including:
routine gynecological exams
contraception
screening for high blood pressure, anemia and diabetes
breast and cervical cancer screening and education
screening and treatment for sexually transmitted infections (STIs)
HIV testing and counseling
pre-pregnancy counseling and education
prenatal care and/or referral
pregnancy testing and confirmation