Something Wrong With This Picture?

Posted October 23, 2007 | 10:57 AM (EST)



stumbleupon :Something Wrong With This Picture?   digg: Something Wrong With This Picture?   reddit: Something Wrong With This Picture?   del.icio.us: Something Wrong With This Picture?

My goodness, I go away for a week and miss all sorts of happenings in the world where sex and politics collide.

I returned from my high school reunion, then a week with family in Arizona without my computer or New York Times subscription, and found messages asking for comment on the Portland, ME, middle school that has added prescription contraceptives to its health clinic services. You can imagine the twitter from the self-righteous right who believe no one would ever think about sex if we pro-sex education and pro-contraception people didn't call it to their attention. They have apparently forgotten their own adolescence (I suggest they attend their high school reunions to revive those repressed memories).

Fortunately, many parents spoke up with exactly what needed to be said: while they rightly prefer that their kids abstain from sexual activity at such a tender age, they want even more for the school to help them keep their kids safe from disease and pregnancy if and when they do become sexually active. The school board voted to keep its policy of providing the full range of contraceptives in its health care formulary.

Meanwhile, there was related national news I was mercifully oblivious to last week as well. It seems that as surely as young people discover their sexuality no matter how ardently adults may wish to the contrary, George W. Bush just as surely and ardently continues his pattern of filling the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs (DASPA) -- the person in charge of administering Title X, our nation's major family planning program for low income uninsured individuals -- with a person -- Dr. Susan Orr, who fundamentally opposes birth control.

Read that last sentence again slowly to fully savor the irony.

With W of course, up is down and down is sideways. We've grown inured to the duplicity, the sleight of hand, the wink while Halliburton profits as our sons and daughters die in Iraq, the ruthlessness with which the one percent get richer while the rest of us get a burgeoning national debt and fewer of us get health insurance.

So it's no surprise that the man talks piously about creating a culture of life while taking funding from lifesaving prevention programs like family planning and giving it to abstinence only preachers. This makes the U. S. the laughingstock of the world's public health organizations and in the end paradoxically increases disease, unintended pregnancies, abortions, and deaths.

Usually, though, this administration and its right wing buddies at least try to obfuscate their Orwellian redefinitions. Not so, however when it comes to overseeing a program founded by his father, and for decades enjoying bipartisan support because it provides contraceptive services to over five million American women each year through some 4,500 public health facilities, preventing 1.3 million unintended pregnancies and hundreds of thousands of abortions, and saving taxpayers $3 on Medicaid pregnancy and newborn-related care for every dollar spent. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists family planning as one of "Ten Greatest Public Health Achievements of the 20th Century" for good reason.

Last year, Dr. Eric Keroack was appointed to the position of DASPA. Among other wacky ideas, Keroack alleged that pre-marital sex changes the brain chemistry so that bonding to another person becomes difficult. A non board-certified ob/gyn, Keroack not only opposed birth control, he was also medical director of A Woman's Concern, one of many chains of so-called Crisis Pregnancy Centers, whose purpose is to dissuade women from choosing abortion under any circumstances. But family planning prevents abortion, right? Yes, but these organizations support sexual abstinence until marriage, oppose contraception, and do not distribute information promoting birth control.

Fortunately for women who depend on Title-X for their most basic health care including annual gyn exams, breast and cervical cancer screening, and birth control methods, Keroack soon fell like Humpty Dumpty from the weight of his own corruption. It turned out he was under investigation for Medicaid fraud in his private practice.

The appointment of Susan Orr -- who is not a medical doctor -- while also clearly in the down is up category, seems less like Humpty Dumpty and more like those Bozo Bop Bags that were popular with kids in the 1960s. You know, the clown punching bags with weights in the bottom so that you could punch and punch till you wore yourself out but never knock it down or out.

Orr, formerly senior director for marriage and families at the Family Research Council, supported Bush's move to strip federal employees' health insurance of contraceptive coverage and told the Washington Post, "We're quite pleased because fertility is not a disease. It's not a medical necessity that you have [contraception]." And she is on record as supporting the gag rule that denies funding to family planning programs that give women accurate information or counseling about abortion.

It's no surprise that the ideological right, exemplified and led by groups such as the Family Research Council, opposes abortion, but now it should be abundantly clear they also oppose birth control. It's not that they don't understand birth control prevents abortion; it's that they don't want women to have birth control in the first place. Or the sexual and reproductive self-determination that goes with the ability to plan and space one's own childbearing.

It also shouldn't surprise anyone that a president who values blind fealty above all tows the line of the far right that he believes elected him, and sees that his administrative appointees do so as well. But he might have instructed Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt to be rather more careful this time in selecting a person who actually supports the program she or he is appointed to administer.

If you agree there is something wrong with this picture, then write and tell Secretary Leavitt. Rep. Louise Slaughter tells you how. While you're at it, copy all your members of Congress and 10 friends, urging them to do the same. Orr can be Keroacked if the public outcry is loud enough.

Comments for this post are now closed

 
 

Comments
43
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- vmcz See Profile I'm a Fan of vmcz permalink

Gloria Feldt needs a megaphone and a bandwagon....everyone needs to hear this!! It is truly amazing how many people just don't get simple logic. My humble observation sees that this group is mainly Fox News educated, indifferent to listening to scientific reports and consequently unable to formulate rational opinions. Thank you for being a voice of reason. Keep it up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:45 AM on 10/25/2007
- mamacat See Profile I'm a Fan of mamacat permalink

Any attorney unwilling to uphold the constitution should automatically be disqualified from government service.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 10/23/2007
- mamacat See Profile I'm a Fan of mamacat permalink

Why, oh why, oh why, do bad things keep happening to our country. Could it have any relationship to the fact that so many people voted for the Republican who was running for President? Nah, probably just a coincidence. No one could be so mean, cruel and ignorant as to try to turn the calendar back to a time when science was ignored in government, could they? Why, the only way that could happen would be if we elected a person, from a political party, that was mean, cruel, ignorant, and reactionary.
Did I just wake up from a long nap, and find that my country has rejected rational thought, compassion, and the Constitution, all in one stroke? I think I'll go back to sleep, and hope I wake up when things are better.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:40 PM on 10/23/2007
- thinkgra See Profile I'm a Fan of thinkgra permalink

This is absolutely standard Republican operating procedure. Destroy a department by appointing someone opposed to it's mission to head it. Remember James Watt at Interior under Reagan? And who can forget the jaw-dropping Alberto Gonsalez?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 10/23/2007
- MsLiz See Profile I'm a Fan of MsLiz permalink

and Clarence Thomas at the EEOC.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:17 AM on 10/24/2007
- ihavenobias See Profile I'm a Fan of ihavenobias permalink

You raise a very important side-issue.

We can't ignore the post-Reagan conservative movement that seems to rely on underfunding, defunding and mismanaging government programs to further bolster the claim that "government is the problem" and therefore the simple and obvious answer is privitization.

Social security is the best modern example of this (although Fema is a close second). How many presidents starting with Reagan spent *hundreds of billions* of dollars from the social security trust fund yet we NEVER hear about it.

What we hear about instead is how social security simply doesn't work and is unsustainable due to poor design, poor administration or the baby-boom.

Someone needs to ask the republican presidential candidates why the ideology behind a man who said "the nine most dangerous words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'" makes sense.

If someone (Reagan in this case) hated government so much, why in the world would he run for its highest office and why should we trust him or any other Grover Norquist style politician (who wants to "drown government in a bathtub") to run our government well?

Would anyone consider it a good idea to hire someone who despises capitalism to be the CEO for a large corporation?

PS---Good examples. I would add Bush attempting to make John "I hate the UN" Bolton a UN ambassador.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:25 PM on 10/23/2007
- CAvoter See Profile I'm a Fan of CAvoter permalink

Why are we still having this debate?!? Haven't science and statistics already resolved this issue? Why aren't people looking at our recent past? Less than a hundred years ago girls were married off at the ripe old ages of 12 and 13 -- yes, they were expected to fulfill all marital obligations. If you're old enough to get pregnant or to get somebody pregnant, you're old enough to learn about birth control and safe sex. Whether this education comes from concerned and educated parents or a concerned and educated society makes no difference. Education is the only solution for the ignorant masses. This INSANE administration has once more proven itself to be the WORST in the history of the once greatest democracy in the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:30 PM on 10/23/2007
- LeftRight See Profile I'm a Fan of LeftRight permalink

This isn't just the admin. This is the whole religious-right that is convinced that if nobody ever heard about sex that nobody would ever have sex until after marriage, just like in the good-'ol-days which never really happened. They are still convinced (and will always be convinced) that Americans never had sex until marriage when we first settled here, and that continued until the 1950s, but those evil hippies ruined it for all of us....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:26 PM on 10/23/2007
- OckhamsElectricRazor See Profile I'm a Fan of OckhamsElectricRazor permalink

You are absolutely right! This is what happens when you let the religious right impose their suburban, plutocratic values on people that live in a completely different reality; when you ransack the safety net so that the schools are forced to the last resource left to kids with no other option; and when bombastic ideology replaces compassionate public service. Yes, it is a shame on America that middle schools are forced to be the last line of defense of such child neglect; but if that be the case, it would a shame if the middle schools were not empowered to rescue these kids.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:25 PM on 10/23/2007
- ConcernedAboutRFuture See Profile I'm a Fan of ConcernedAboutRFuture permalink

Well, if more people are born in squalor, to uneducated parents, or to abusive homes, they usually join the army out of desperation or become part of the dumbed down society...that would give the republicans more control in the future... because ignorant sheep get complacent and are easily led.... to the wolf's lair.

Now THAT's thinking ahead.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 PM on 10/23/2007
- FirstShirt See Profile I'm a Fan of FirstShirt permalink

Re: schools providing sex education and birth control information. Have you ever considered that school personnel may not be competent, or appropriate, to do this task?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:35 PM on 10/23/2007
- ihavenobias See Profile I'm a Fan of ihavenobias permalink

Well, I think we can almost all agree that, for the most part, school personnel will be far more competent and appropriate than the other likely source of information (assuming parents aren't involved).

The other likely source of information I'm referring to is schoolyard friends and porn.

So I ask you, which do you prefer?

And if your answer is "the parents", no one disagrees.

The problem is, there are far too many parents who don't, won't or can't provide a comprehensive and competent overview of this crucial issue.

And hey, for the parents that think they DO in fact provide it, why so much concern about the school sex-ed? I mean, shouldn't their kids have well instilled values and a strong knowledge base, along with the ability to ask their parents if they're confused?

If little Bobby and Suzy don't understand why the man at school was telling them different things than mommy and daddy, let them ask so mommy and daddy can put their own spin on it. No one is stopping them from doing that.

Heck, school gets them, what 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week? As for sex-ed, they get *a few hours a year*, if that. Parents get them for the rest of the time, including holidays, weekends and summer.

So again, if you're a *good* parent, what exactly are you so worried about? And if you're a bad parent, be happy that *someone* is teaching your kids the basics they need.

theyoungturks.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:13 PM on 10/23/2007
- Rrhain See Profile I'm a Fan of Rrhain permalink

Let me be the one who disagrees, then.

Why do we let teachers educate our students regarding things like math, physics, literature, history, etc.? There are many reasons but one of the big ones is that they are much better at it than we are.

We have people out there claiming that condoms can't stop HIV transmission in direct contradiction to all evidence. Should we really allow that attitude to prevail, simply because the person spewing the lie is the parent of the child?

Everybody is entitled to their opinion. They are not entitled to their facts and the facts are that while abstinence certainly avoids all issues of sex, you need to know how to protect yourself when you finally get around to having sex. As a parent once said during a school board meeting out where I live, the difference between drugs and sex and why we don't teach kids how to do drugs safely is that we don't ever want our kids doing drugs. We do, eventually, want them to have sex.

And thus, we need to teach our children honestly and without shame or fear.

What makes anybody think a parent, simply because he or she is a parent, is capable of doing such?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 10/23/2007
- horseface See Profile I'm a Fan of horseface permalink

The question is, At what age should a girl be taught that she, and only she, owns her body, mind, and soul? The religious right would say, never! Girls are to be steered into the marriage-ownership contract having no experience with sex, no individuality, no choices. IE, men own women.

If girls were taught their rights and options in school, encouraged to develop as individual human beings, perhaps FEWER would be coerced into early sex. The problem is, either way, girls are horribly manipulated by both religion and pressure from pop culture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:49 PM on 10/23/2007
- TLV See Profile I'm a Fan of TLV permalink

I can't help thinking some bizarre group of people who have this dream that there will be hordes of human beings available for slavery so they can build the equivalent of their "pyramids."

We have come so far. Why are their now people appointed by this backward administration who want to take all of us backward as well?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 PM on 10/23/2007
- Brainoverbraun See Profile I'm a Fan of Brainoverbraun permalink

This issue in not about sex it is about control. Throughout history men have used religion to control women. Many American men seem to long for the 50's with the stay at homes Mom's they remember from their childhood. Wake up guys - those women were miserable - many drugged with alcohol and other pharmaceuticals to maintain the happy facade. American women need to be vigilant or in your own way you will be second class just like women in Iran.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:33 PM on 10/23/2007
- mgloraine See Profile I'm a Fan of mgloraine permalink

When will people understand that this is not about women's rights; women have no rights, they are PROPERTY, and only caucasian males are allowed to make decisions about sex and childbirth. Now get back to the kitchen and fix me some supper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 10/23/2007
- sorenmeetsdylan See Profile I'm a Fan of sorenmeetsdylan permalink

What profane stupidity.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:40 PM on 10/23/2007
- Kansas Evans See Profile I'm a Fan of Kansas Evans permalink

Yeah, I kinda see that way. They want to make the decisions about sex and childbirth. I don't think they care what happens to women so long as they can impregnate their wives and any other woman at will. They especially wanna know if their wives have been impregnated by someone else. And if she dies because she cared a ectopical pregnancy to term, well that just saves them the trouble of stoning her.

Though, I wouldn't limit that mindset to only white men. They may be the only ones now who have an entire presidential administration behind them.

To another point in the article, it's naive to carry on as if NO middle schooler is having sex. There's a saying the Religious Right should know: God takes care of babies and fools. Now, whatever category we place middle school children, they need to be protected from themselves...and the sexualized images, some of other babies and fools, that are EVERYWHERE!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 PM on 10/23/2007
- OhgReaTone See Profile I'm a Fan of OhgReaTone permalink

The constant barrage of morality from the conservative right, the disturbing conflict of applying their economic agenda to the morality of human nature, is lost in translation. Translation: Poor people should have children to fight our wars.
Ohg.
http://thefireside.wordpress.com/2007/10/21/the-need-for-healthy-children-to-fight-our-wars/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 PM on 10/23/2007
- jazzman See Profile I'm a Fan of jazzman permalink

Bush does not change and talking about it isn't going to do anything. If we are going to change things it's going to have to come through external pressure using refusal to confirm nomination and cutting off funding for his misguided policies not through reasoning. This has been clear for years now but the Congress can't seem to adapt to a person who is so woodenheaded and step up to the plate to deal with him.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 PM on 10/23/2007
- research See Profile I'm a Fan of research permalink

Jazz: I keep thinking a coordinated general strike till the war is ended might work. A sickout, slowdown etc.. But it has to be all at the same time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 AM on 10/24/2007
- OckhamsElectricRazor See Profile I'm a Fan of OckhamsElectricRazor permalink

Let me get this straight:
Unwanted pregnancies and the often devastating personal, social and economic consequences are bad.
Contracting HIV/AIDS or a host of STDs is also bad.
Rising insurance costs is bad.
But Birth Control is WORSE??!
History will rank this unholy stance on a par with burning witches. Sometimes only the truly religious are the ones capable of being truly wicked.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 AM on 10/23/2007
- BMSstudy See Profile I'm a Fan of BMSstudy permalink

You are OK, I assume, with a middle school employee making a decision to give Rx medicine to your middle-schooler because he/she makes that informed decision. Most of the discussion we hear is about School nurses doing this, so it is allowable for a school nurse to dispense Rx medication to preteens and teens when a nurse has no rights to do that for anyone else, anywhere, correct? That same school nurse (at least in my school district,) cannot give aspiren/advil/etc... without the parents written consent.

How about this...

Shootings - bad
Gov't take guns (I no it is a large stretch, but...)

Drinking and Driving - bad

Smoking - bad

Over Eating fatty foods/no exercise/etc... - bad

What are the acceptable solutions for the last 3 that you will allow school/gov't to mandate a solution for you?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:11 PM on 10/23/2007
- LeftRight See Profile I'm a Fan of LeftRight permalink

Shootings. Lets see, not required to have a gun, and the gov't has tried to limit the worst guns. I support this, since shootings affect other people.

Drinking and driving. Illegal, and it should be, since it affects other people

Smoking, I'm wishy washy on this one, since I am a smoker, and I think that they should either ban them completely or not at all.

Over eating/fatty foods/etc.. Doesn't affect other people, gov't shouldn't be there.


Now then, since we've gotten the stuff out of the way that has nothing to do with the subject, kids are not going to be forced to go to the facility, nor are they going to be forced to use any products. This is simply allowing those who choose to do something that they probably shouldn't, but can, do, do so safely.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:35 PM on 10/23/2007
- OckhamsElectricRazor See Profile I'm a Fan of OckhamsElectricRazor permalink

Oh, puh-lease. Yes, there are many public, private sector and religious groups that attempt to give these girls a break. But they are swimming upstream against a reactionary, Republican ideology of denial and recrimination.

No, this is what happens when you let the religious right impose their suburban, plutocratic values on people that live in a completely different reality; when you ransack the safety net so that the schools are forced to the last resource left to kids with no other option; and when bombastic ideology replaces compassionate public service. Yes, it is a shame on America that middle schools are forced to be the last line of defense of such child neglect; but if that be the case, it would a shame if the middle schools were not empowered to rescue these kids.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:17 PM on 10/23/2007
- Laserbeam See Profile I'm a Fan of Laserbeam permalink

Once again, a misinformed person chiming in anyway....

Your words stating, "...without the parents (sic) written consent..." are ignorant.

None of the healthcare workers can dispense anything without the parents' written permission in this case. Furthermore, the facility is actually a Public Health facility located on the school campus. The population it serves is not limited to the middle school students though it can include them - again, ONLY with parents' written consent. In other words, not staffed by "school nurses".

Please try to spend your time becoming informed and THEN opining.

Thanks

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 10/23/2007
- Rrhain See Profile I'm a Fan of Rrhain permalink

Logical error: Strawman.

Answer the question: If unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted disease, and rising insurance costs that would be employed in dealing with the aftermath of the previous two are bad, why is birth control worse?

Don't pretend that your outrage is simply over prescription birth control (which, by the way, also requires consent from the parents).

As pointed out before: We don't ever want our children to shoot somebody. We don't ever want them to drink and drive. We don't ever want them to take up smoking. We don't ever want them to have bad diet/exercise habits.

We do, eventually, want them to have sex.

Shouldn't we make sure that they have everything they need to keep themselves safe? How is birth control worse than what happens without it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 PM on 10/23/2007
- davedave See Profile I'm a Fan of davedave permalink

often said we get the government we deserve.

not ALL of us are THAT BAD!!!!

d

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 AM on 10/23/2007
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in