Recently my mother told me something shocking. When she decided that her family was complete and sought a tubal ligation from her doctor (aka "to have her tubes tied"), she was told that her husband would have to sign a form giving his consent. This was not during the dark ages, but the dawn of the 1980s. And this was not some third world country practicing sharia law, but Texas. (Yes, I can already hear some of the 3rd world jokes many of you are making about my home state right about now. To which I say, "Hook 'em Horns.")
Her story was a stark reminder that it really wasn't that long ago that our country was stuck in the dark ages when it comes to women having the right to control our own bodies. It was also a powerful reminder that while abortion remains the most divisive reproductive rights issue -- and the one likely to garner the most headlines -- it is not necessarily the most important. There are countless reproductive rights issues that affect all women -- including those who may not consider themselves pro-choice. These are the issues I consider most at stake with the ongoing assault on Planned Parenthood. And it is through these issues that President Obama may end up leaving his greatest legacy.
Last week a nonpartisan panel convened by the Institute of Medicine recommended that insurance companies be required to cover birth control for free as a form of preventive care under the new health care law. If the government follows the panel's recommendations, this could end up being not just one of the most important moments in the reproductive rights movement since Roe v. Wade, but the most important moment ever. (Click here to see some of the most important reproductive rights cases besides Roe v. Wade.)
A poll released during the 50th anniversary of the birth control pill found that cost remains a key barrier for couples when it comes to using contraception. As I have noted in a previous column, "though it seems like it would be a no brainer for insurers to cover birth control rather than face the prospect of eventually covering another dependent, a 2007 Mercer study found that while about 70 percent of insurers provide coverage for erectile dysfunction medications, (as in Viagra) HALF of all health insurance plans do not provide contraceptive coverage."
Though legally and theoretically available to all, contraception has certainly not been accessible to all, with class status and education historically being one of the indicators of contraception use and family size. (A recent analysis found that low-income men who abuse their partners often hide or sabotage birth control as another form of controlling them.) With poverty being a key indicator for dropping out of high school and incarceration, this means that the ability to control the size of one's family is a social and political issue that affects many others.
I surprised a reporter recently when I said that I consider family planning the most important domestic or international political issue, because from my vantage point it affects almost all others in some way, shape or form. Wars are often fought over land or resources that people are trying to protect (or take) so that their families can have them and benefit from them. The environment struggles in large part from overpopulation and overuse. People often turn to crime, like theft and dealing drugs, because they lack the skills or opportunity to support their families, or themselves, any other way.
This is why I have always been baffled when those who claim to care about these issues, and others -- particularly abortion -- don't treat access to contraception as one of their most important political issues too. But if the Obama administration makes headway in removing the financial barrier to contraception -- for all women -- it will have made one of its greatest policy contributions not just to women, but all families.
Keli Goff is the author of The GQ Candidate and a Contributing Editor for TheLoop21.com, where this piece was originally published.
Follow Keli Goff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keligoff
Cecile Richards: Birth Control You Can Afford -- It's About Time!
Rev. Debra Haffner: The Religious Reasons Why Abortion is a Moral Decision
Jon O'Brien: Catholic Women And Contraception: It's Beyond Don't Ask, Don't Tell
Says it all and worth repeating. Most still don't get that more babies means more spending, more traffic, more pollution, MORE TAXES and more wear and tear on the infrastructure and the environment.
It will be interesting to see if free birth control will make a difference.
America has one of the highest rate of abortion of all such comparable nations. All the other nations mentioned have far more complete health care systems. So what do you think that likely answer to your question is?
Where abortions occur:
78% of all abortions are obtained in DEVELOPING COUNTRIES and 22% occur in developed countries.
Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from here...
http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/AbortionStatistics.htm
In 2010 the US rate was 22.6% The following broadly comparable countries were lower than that...
New Zealand 2008 21.6
France 2007 21.4
Norway 2008 20.9
United Kingdom 2008 20.9
Canada 2006 20.7
Australia 2007 20.2
Japan 2007 19.1
Denmark 2006 18.8
Spain 2008 18.2
Italy 2008 17.4
Turkey 2008 17.0
Iceland 2008 16.5
Finland 2008 14.9
Germany 2008 14.4
Netherlands 2007 13.5
Greece 2005 13.3
Switzerland 2008 12.4
Portugal 2008 11.9
South Africa 2007 7.7
Austria 2000 3.0
From here ... http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/wrjp334pd.html
Too many these days are gathering to chant "we're number won!"
I don't get the outrage. If you can't agree on whether or not to have children, and you're going to do whatever your want regardless of your significant other's feelings, then maybe you shouldn't be together.
I can only imagine the outrage if a man was to covertly get a vasectomy and not inform his wife, who was wanted to have a child.
Couples should agree with this. A wife should sign-off on the vasectomy just like the husband should sign-off on the tubal.
If someone is completely against having children, which their S.O. definitely wants, then tell them and let them walk away from your relationship IF they choose and find someone who they are better suited for.
In an ideal world, all relationships would be loving and communicative. In our world, a lot of relationships are abusive. Virtually everyone knows an abusive couple. If we give couples legal powers over each others' bodies, some people will abuse it.
That's perceptive.
And of course I would think so, because, as I say to people: Population is THE environmental issue, period.
There is nothing we do as a species - outside of our cruelty to other forms of life, most particularly each other - that would be an issue, were our population not what it is.
And the reporter's surprise? Given my perception of the media and their understanding of the world we live in: doesn't surprise me, one bit.
Even in America, the population growth is driven by red states; small town Texas has ten times the birth rate of Manhattan.
I know celibacy sounds good in theory, but demographic statistics don't lie: birth control distribution and education is neccessary even in religious areas because religious people apparently like to have sex too.
Also, a slim majority of people accessing free birth control at Planned Parenthood are married couples. Does celibacy work for married couples too?
How is it that the one that wants to have the children is never accused of not knowing themselves well enough to know what they want out of life?
2. I LOOOOVE your picture. Hyacinth Bucket, is it?!
If you would like to do it tomorrow, what prevents you from getting it scheduled?
Really, not being a wise guy at all. Just curious.
As long as women rely on the courts, they DO NOT have any guarantee of equal rights whatsoever.
Get off your pretty little butts and get to work, because we men aren't going to do it for you.
Of course, if you would prefer to spend the rest of your life as a 2nd class citizen, you're free to.