National Abortion Federation Blog: Saporta Reporter

Yesterday we issued the following the release:

National Abortion Federation Denounces Misleading Anti-Abortion Ad Campaign in Canada

Saporta: This is another example of an anti-abortion organization using misleading images and misinformation to advance their agenda of banning abortion.

Toronto, ON - Today, the National Abortion Federation (NAF) condemned Life Canada's national anti-abortion ad campaign.

The image in the ad is of a nine-month-pregnant woman and the text of the ad states, "Nine months: the length of time abortion is allowed in Canada. No medical reason needed. Abortion, have we gone too far?"

"This is another example of an anti-abortion organization using misleading images and misinformation to advance their agenda of banning abortion. Doctors in Canada only provide abortion care up until 23 weeks 6 days from a woman's last menstrual period unless a woman's health or life is at risk or the fetus has a lethal anomaly," said Vicki Saporta, President and CEO of NAF. "These types of tactics and propaganda used by anti-abortion advocates often backfire and even those who oppose abortion often object to the misleading images and misinformation."
The cities of Fredericton, New Brunswick and Kelowna, British Columbia have refused to run these ads on public transportation and Hamilton, Ontario has decided to pull the ads, citing that they were "offensive" and "controversial."

"Women deserve accurate information when making decisions about an unintended pregnancy," said Saporta. "Groups that peddle misinformation in the hope of dissuading women from obtaining abortion care are doing women a great disservice."

NAF provides unbiased, factual information about abortion care through our toll-free Hotline (1-800-772-9100) and website (www.prochoice.org ).

Today we celebrate the 20th Anniversary of R v. Morgentaler, the Supreme Court decision that decriminalized abortion by striking down Canada's abortion law as unconstitutional. Since then, Canada has become one of a small number of countries without a federal law restricting abortion.

The Morgentaler decision has undoubtedly protected the health and saved the lives of countless Canadian women. However, as we reflect on this decision’s impact, we are reminded that in some provinces and territories women are still denied equal access to abortion care. Even though abortion is considered a safe, legal, and insured service, access is variable across the country. For example:

• There are no abortion services available in Prince Edward Island.
• In New Brunswick, a woman can only obtain a publicly funded abortion if provided by an ob/gyn in a hospital with written approval from two doctors.
• Abortion is not part of the inter-provincial billing agreement. Therefore students attending school in another province, or women who have recently moved and are in the process of transitioning their health care benefits, are forced to pay the full cost of their abortion care or incur additional expenses traveling back to their home province. Abortion is the only time sensitive service that is de-listed and its exclusion remains a significant barrier to care for many women.
• The majority of abortion care is provided in urban centres. Women living in rural communities often face challenges in accessing care.
  

Now more than ever, it is important that we don’t lose sight of the women who continue to face these obstacles in order to obtain the abortion care they need. We must continue to work together to ensure that women have the same access to abortion care regardless of where they live.

It is critical to the lives and health of Canadian women that abortion is safe, legal, and accessible. We must remain vigilant in preserving reproductive freedom so that we never have to return to the days of back alley abortions where our sisters, mothers, and friends had to risk their health—and sometimes even their lives—to end an unwanted pregnancy.

A Canadian anti-abortion group has launched a national ad campaign, which attempts to mislead the public about abortion care in Canada. The ads have been getting national media attention and in some cases have been removed due to their content.

The cities of Fredericton, New Brunswick and Kelowna, British Columbia have refused to run these ads on public transportation and Hamilton, Ontario has decided to pull the ads, citing that they were "offensive" and "controversial." This is another example of an anti-abortion organization using misleading images and misinformation to advance their agenda of banning abortion.

Doctors in Canada only provide abortion care up until 23 weeks 6 days from a woman’s last menstrual period unless a woman’s health or life is at risk or the fetus has a lethal anomaly. These types of tactics and propaganda used by anti-abortion advocates often backfire and even those who oppose abortion often object to the misleading images and misinformation.

This week, a federal appeals court ruled that the state of Missouri must provide transportation for inmates who want to obtain abortion care.

In 2005, prison officials in Missouri went to extreme lengths to deny a woman prisoner abortion care. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asked a court to require the prison to transport the woman for an abortion as they would for all other serious medical needs. When the court ruled that the prison must transport the woman to a nearby health care facility, the state unsuccessfully asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene; the woman received the care she needed. The American Civil Liberties Union then brought a class-action lawsuit on behalf of all incarcerated pregnant women in Missouri seeking abortions.

“Today’s decision is consistent with rulings from across the country that women prisoners do not lose their reproductive rights once they are incarcerated,” said Diana Kasdan, a staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “Prison officials must ensure that women have access to the full spectrum of pregnancy-related care, including abortion.”

Since Missouri law prohibits the use of state tax money to pay for abortions, the prisoner is still responsible for the cost of the procedure. A similar case was decided in Arizona last year.

Today marks the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion care in the United States. On this historic anniversary, it is important that we celebrate what we have achieved under the legacy of Roe while also assessing the challenges that lie ahead.

Roe has undoubtedly saved the lives and protected the health of countless women. As we mark this milestone of 35 years of safe, legal abortion care, we must remain vigilant in preserving this freedom so that we never have to return to the days of back-alley abortions when women had to sacrifice their lives and health to end an unwanted pregnancy.

In the 35 years since Roe, many new reproductive health care options have become available to women. These include a variety of safe and effective contraceptive methods, emergency contraception, early medical abortion using mifepristone (RU-486), and safe surgical abortion. Despite these advances in reproductive health care, a woman's fundamental right to make her own reproductive health care decisions continues to be eroded by politicians and the courts.

Women deserve to have access to safe abortion care, free from the interference of politicians. Legislative attacks on Roe and a woman's right to choose are all too common in state legislatures. In 2007 alone, more than 450 anti-choice bills were filed in states across the country. Although the vast majority of these bills were not enacted, several states passed extreme legislation that would ban all safe abortion procedures at all stages of pregnancy if Roe were overturned.

It is critical to the lives and health of millions of women that the protections of Roe not be further weakened. NAF will continue to work to ensure that abortion remains safe, legal, and accessible to promote health and justice for women.

In this month’s Vogue, writer Lori Campbell shares her experience with a complicated pregnancy and her decision to obtain a second trimester abortion. In 1998, 22 weeks into a wanted pregnancy, Campbell was diagnosed with an incompetent cervix. Her water broke, and doctors told her she would likely go into labor within a week and her fetus would have only a one percent chance of survival and was almost guaranteed to have severe disabilities including brain damage.

Campbell and her husband made the choice to terminate the pregnancy using a procedure that has since been outlawed by the Supreme Court. During her experience, Campbell notes the one thing that never factored into her decision was politics. Unfortunately, last year’s Supreme Court decision to ban certain abortion procedures placed politics above protecting women's health. When the Court issued its decision in April, Campbell says she “couldn’t help thinking, they cannot know what they are doing.”

Government officials in Madrid have pledged to protect abortion providers from violence and harassment after approximately 40 clinics began a five-day strike on Tuesday.

Soledad Mestre, a government delegate to Madrid, said local abortion clinics could solicit police protection against death threats or acts involving graffiti made by ultra-conservative or neo- Nazi groups.

The clinics began the strike to protest what they said was persecution by anti-abortion campaigners and government inspectors, who have swept clinics in recent weeks to crack down on illegal terminations. Recently, clinics have been vandalized and abortion providers have been harassed—and even assaulted—by anti-abortion protesters, according to the Association of Accredited Abortion Clinics, which organized the strike.

The striking clinics provide the majority of abortions in the country and the strike is estimated to affect as many as 2,000 women. However, the clinics are still accepting emergency cases during the strike.

According to a Guttmacher Institute study published in this month’s Journal of Family Issues, women’s sense of responsibility for their existing and future children influences their decision to obtain abortion care. The study found that the majority (61%) of U.S. women who have abortions are already mothers, more than half of whom have two or more children.

“Among those women with children, the most commonly cited reason for choosing to have an abortion was the concern that having another child would compromise the care given to existing children,” said Rachel K. Jones, senior researcher with the Guttmacher Institute. “Women felt that they were already stretched thin financially, emotionally and physically—and they wanted to put the children they already had front and center. Two-thirds of women who gave this answer were at or below the poverty line and received little help from their partners.”

Through our toll-free Hotline and website, women from diverse backgrounds tell us about their abortion experiences every day. This latest study confirms something that we know to be true from these patient stories: women who have abortions are the same women who have children, just at different times in their lives.

>Call our Hotline: 1-800-772-9100
>Share your story about your abortion experience.

The U.S. Supreme Court today decided not to hear an appeal from an anti-abortion group to reconsider a Michigan law banning so called “partial birth abortions.” By doing so, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled the Michigan law was unconstitutional because it could also ban other abortion procedures stands.

The NonProfit Times published a piece this week examining the security procedures implemented by nonprofit organizations in the wake of violent acts such as the December shootings at two Colorado churches.

Since abortion was legalized in 1973, reproductive health care clinics and workers have unfortunately become the targets of violence and harassment by anti-abortion extremists. For this reason, NAF has been on the forefront of the nonprofit community in creating security protocols and training our members to ensure staff and patient safety. The article discusses the publications and protocols NAF provides to our members as well as our extensive database of violence statistics.

>Read the full article.
>Learn more about clinic violence.