Protect Women's Health BEFORE the election

Ok, we all have our eye on the November prize, but we also mustn't lose sight of the fact that there are a whole bunch of legislative and policy initiatives already on the table that, if decided before the end of the current administration, could be hard to unravel.

Hillary Rodham Clinton (you know who she is, right?) and Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, have a piece in today's NY Times that draws attention to one such policy initiative.

The short of it is that the Bush administration is working to issue a rule through the Department of Health and Human Services that would require any medical office that receives federal funding--whether a doctor in private practice, a hospital, or a clinic--to sign a statement saying that no one who works there will be required to "assist in any way with medical services they find objectionable."

This goes far beyond legislation, which already exists, that exempts medical professionals from performing an abortion if they object on moral grounds, and opens the door for individuals to deny women access to a whole range of services from contraception to sterilization if the provider doesn't like the idea. And, as Clinton and Richards point out:

"The rule would also allow providers to refuse to participate in unspecified “other medical procedures” that contradict their religious beliefs or moral convictions. This, too, could be interpreted as a free pass to deny access to contraception.

Many circumstances unrelated to reproductive health could also fall under the umbrella of “other medical procedures.” Could physicians object to helping patients whose sexual orientation they find objectionable? Could a receptionist refuse to book an appointment for an H.I.V. test? What about an emergency room doctor who wishes to deny emergency contraception to a rape victim? Or a pharmacist who prefers not to refill a birth control prescription?"

Because we know that the best way to reduce abortion is to provide good information about and access to birth control, this policy seems completely at odds with a pro-life agenda except in its most narrow individual, self-interested interpretations.

Clearly, policy such as this would be more likely to be supported by a McCain-Palin administration than an Obama-Biden one, but by November 4th the damage may already be done.

The 30-day comment period on the rule expires on September 25th.

If this is an issue you care about you can take action by learning the details of the rule, submitting comments opposing the policy, forwarding this blog post by clicking on the envelope below, and Digging this story so more people hear about it and take action.