Contribute
Support Left in the West to continue our work:
Blog Ads

Syndication

RSS

Email Updates

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Full Disclosure
Matt Singer works for Forward Montana. He also is a partner in DP Productions, a small, Montana-based T-Shirt company.


Search




Advanced Search


Access Denied - Battle Against Birth Control Rages on in Montana

by: Allyson

Wed May 30, 2007 at 15:27:26 PM MDT


I spend every day of my life embroiled in the debate around reproductive rights as the director of NARAL Pro-Choice Montana. Most of you reading this probably think my job is about protecting women's access to abortion care. That's true, but what you might not realize is that more and more, my job entails defending women's right to access birth control, reproductive healthcare, and our young people's right to receive medically accurate information about sexuality in Montana schools.

Many people may not know the next line of attack for the anti-choice movement is birth control.  That's right--birth control.  It doesn't take much looking to uncover the anti-choice movement's disdain for birth control and family planning.  Recently, a Missoula crisis pregnancy center tabled on U of M's campus suggesting that being on birth control makes you more susceptible to HIV/AIDS!  Watch this interaction between Mary Alice Carr of NARAL Pro-Choice New York and anti-choice, abstinence-only activist Leslie Unruh of South Dakota (part of the crew behind the South Dakota abortion ban), who calls birth control a "pesticide," among other things. 

At the 2007 Legislative Session, anti-choice hardliners successfully fought off an attempt to get funding for comprehensive sex education programs.  They also attempted over and over and over to strip money for family planning services in Montana from the budget, which finally resulted in an angry floor debate where anti-choice leaders tried to confuse abortion with birth control.

98% of women will use some form of birth control at some point in their lives.  Despite the fact that birth control is basic health care for women, renegade pharmacists across the country have been routinely denying to fill women's prescriptions for birth control and Emergency Contraception (the morning-after pill).  Some pharmacists even go so far as to lecture women, humiliate them in public, or refuse to hand back the prescription after they refuse to fill it.

In Great Falls, Snyder Drug has new ownership.  With that new ownership came a new policy: they will no longer be filling women's prescriptions for birth control.  The new owners have ties to the anti-choice community  and now own two pharmacies in Great Falls.  My organization is in the process of working with local activists in Great Falls to do more research into their policy and what they are telling consumers about birth control, what other drugs they dispense (Viagra anyone?), see what other pharmacies in Great Falls are refusing to fill birth control or EC prescriptions, and come up with an action plan.

NARAL Pro-Choice Montana believes pharmacies have an ethical obligation to honor valid, legal prescriptions and avoid jeopardizing their patients' health.  In Montana's rural communities, there may only be one pharmacy in town.  What if that one pharmacy was refusing to fill birth control prescriptions?  Since when does a pharmacist have the right to decide whether or not to fill your prescription and interfere in the doctor-patient relationship?

If you're interested in getting involved with NARAL Pro-Choice Montana or want to know what you can do in your community to protect reproductive rights, go to: www.prochoicemontana.org or contact me at prochoice@mt.net. 

Allyson :: Access Denied - Battle Against Birth Control Rages on in Montana
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
That phrase ... (0.00 / 0)
"anti-choice" is so strained. You're trying to load too much ideology into two words. Why not just loosen up and call it what it is - "pro-abortion". It's OK by me and most people. It's just two things that create problems for you: 1) the far right, which is mainstream Republican these days, and 2) late term abortions, which are not common, but are troubling nonetheless to everyone.

you mean "pro-life"? (0.00 / 0)
right?

[ Parent ]
Of course (0.00 / 0)
Only conservatives are good at naming things. Seriously. The "Death Tax" "Compassionate Conservative"... You guys really know how to bullshit. It isn't pro-abortion because believe it or not most of us are honestly pro-choice. They are two different things. Can ya dig?

[ Parent ]
Notorious Mark T...a pro-lifer??? (0.00 / 0)
It can't be! My world would implode!

I think he meant "pro-life" instead of "pro-abortion." The latter is, of course, the appellation used for pro-choicers from the right.

But you're dead on about using words. Who's that dude that wrote about that? The Elephant guy. George Lakoff. That's the premise to his book..."Don't Think of an Elephant." Haven't read it. Should.


[ Parent ]
This is not computing ... (0.00 / 0)
I am in favor of abortion rights for women. But I chafe at abuse of language. I thought the lengths to which she went to identify herself as "pro-choice" and those against her as "anti-choice" made for hard reading -- ideology-laden and strained verbiage.

I am troubled by late term abortions. If a child can survive outside the womb, then an abortion is deeply troubling to me.

But before that time, I've no problem with all other abortions. None. Read me bloggin' on the subject.


[ Parent ]
It's a tough question (0.00 / 0)
I used to be a fan of using other's terms for themselves as a way of keeping debate respectful -- the term anti-life is both false and rude, doing little to help dialogue.

But the term pro-life is also misleading, as good research in social science show. A lot of people are "pro-life" in personal values, but "pro-choice" when it comes to the question of whether the government should regulate abortion.

Using terminology that highlights the policy stance of someone, as opposed to the moral stance of someone, is useful for public policy reasons.

As for late term abortions, you probably already know that they are exceedingly rare. In most cases, late term abortions occur for two reasons: 1) the woman either did not know she was pregnant until very late in the pregnancy or lacked the resources to get an earlier abortion or (inclusive or) 2) the health or life of either the mother or child is in serious doubt.

Often, these two issues can be combined. I read once about a 13-year-old girl who sought a third trimester abortion. She had been raped by her brother and didn't understand what had happened to her or that she could be pregnant. In that case, caring the pregnancy to term would have been very rough indeed.

Given the rarity of late term abortions and the extremity of anecdotes I've heard, I refrain from judging the women involved. And because I think in this realm it's especially awful to trap the innocent in order to punish the few wicked, I still support the government refraining from interfering.

I'm not saying I don't see where you're coming from. I'm just trying to provide some food for thought.


[ Parent ]
Good points (0.00 / 0)
Just from a word-usage standpoint, I prefer the term "reproductive freedom". It avoids the 'a' word, and take in contraception as well, while emphasizing that a woman who is forced by the state to bear a child lacks the most basic of human rights. I'm entirely in favor of reproductive freedom for women.

Glad to hear that late-term abortions are rare. Are you aware of any stats on this?


[ Parent ]
Here's some CDC Figures (0.00 / 0)
1.4% of abortions occur after week 20. The CDC apparently doesn't distinguish after week 20, so it's a smaller number that are "post-viability."

[ Parent ]
Thanks ... (0.00 / 0)
That's reassuring.

[ Parent ]
Pro-life, you bet!! (0.00 / 0)
I frequently tell people I'm pro-life, pro those lives already existing and trying to make good choices to continue living a worthwhile and productive life instead of having babies and making the lives and the lives of their parents miserable.  One could claim that the Catholic countries of Italy and Spain were the step-children of the European Economic Community for so long because so many families had too many children to feed and not enough income to do it.

Of Course (0.00 / 0)
they are wanting to dictate how others should live. That is what authoritarians and totalitarians do. If it has to do with safety what else do they sell. Forcing child bearing on others has no moral ground. This is just another issue they can use to mistreat others. They are mostly miserable, fearful or guilty in their own life and are jealous of those who are not. Same for cranks who post endless tangents and want to argue endlessly. Ignore them. Organize and take action.

If the pharmacy refuses to make birth control available start a campaign to boycott them. Let their supporters support them and keep them in business. Why not have doctors fill their own prescriptions and cut out the middle man. Certainly less conflict of interest than pharmacists who know less about your health than you or your doctor. If the only pharmacies in town won't provide birth contraceptives then push to have All Abortions legal in that town. Afterall, that's the alternative they are given.

War has been declared on you and you need to respond in kind to those who accuse you falsely of being what they themselves are.
 


Allyson (0.00 / 0)
First off - Thanks for the work that you do.  It's tough with tons of people either hate you for what you do and others who think that you don't do enough.

I have a question about pharmacists denying perscriptions.  Legally, how can they get away with failing to dispense what a doctor has precribed without having a degree in medicine?  Legally aren't they substituting their judgement for the doctor's when they do this?  How is this legal?

Sincerly,
Lisa


Legal Issues (4.00 / 1)
Lisa: We're currently looking into MT law right now.  As far as I know, the only MT law allowing refusal of treatment for moral or religious reasons in reproductive health care is in regards to abortion and sterilization.  Some states actually have laws allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions, Montana is not one of them.  I don't know if there's a difference between an entire pharmacy choosing to no longer stock a drug and an individual pharmacist refusing to dispense something.  We did, however find out the pharmacy is stocking Viagra, because they say erectile dysfunction is a disease and conception isn't.  We're still trying to figure out the best course of action to take for our state.  It may end up being a proposal at the next legislative session.

[ Parent ]
Not a lawyer (3.00 / 1)
But is there a discrimination claim here? I'm not sure what kind of laws Montana has prohibiting discrimination by public establishments, but it seems that's a line of reasoning to look into.

[ Parent ]
Sex is.......... (0.00 / 0)
FOR PROCREATION ONLY!  Don't you folks GET it?!  It ain't SUPPOSED to be for recreation!  Procreation not RECreation!  The country NEEDS worker bees.  And consumers!  Don't forget consumers!  THAT is what makes Murca great!  THAT is the economic engine that drives economic development!  And G-O-D LOVE economic development!  Look, it's simple.  Every Murcan has a DUTY to produce as many worker bee/christians as they can.  We are in a global economy now.  So we GOTSTA compete globally!  Breed is our creed!  Oh, and soldiers too!  We need soldiers. Don't forget king georgie's war on terror!  Them evil doers are breedin' like rats!  AND THEY'RE MUSLIMS!  We gotta compete!  Be fruitful and multiply!  Not my words.  G-0-D's!  You can bet your Murcan flag that them Muslims don't use no birth control!  So, in conclusion, it AIN'T  bein' pro-choice or pro-life, it's bein' PRO-MURCAN! Is you or isn't you Pro Murcan?! Anybody who's havin' sex for fun just ain't red white and blue! 

Seriously though, folks.  In case you haven't noticed, the Repubbie party has been taken over by nutjobs!  These people truly do believe that everyone should view sex and reproduction like they do.  They firmly believe that ANY means to prevent pregnancy is a violation of God's law.  Scary stuff.  They are not simply anti-abortion.  They are anti-birth control too!  And this is simply insane.  And scoot sales and co. want to take their party even FURTHER to the extreme right.  Better start payin' attention to the forces behind these folks.  Check out the Domionism sometime, or maybe the Constitution Party.  It's time.


Allyson-- (0.00 / 0)
Keep up the good work. There are so many people who are silent supporters of what you do.

But it's getting to the point where we can't be silent about this crap any more. Birth control? Seriously? I never thought it was possible.

I've never boycotted a damn thing in my life. I usually consider it a waste of time and an inconvenience.

I am boycotting Snyder (formerly Western) Drug. This is frickin' ridiculous.


Why should I care? (0.00 / 0)
Its the responsibility of anyone who has sex (outside of rape) to get their own protection, you socialist dimwit.
Why don't these women get their sex partners to chip in on birth control. Why should my taxes pay for silly trollups like you to spread your legs for anyone.
After getting on welfare any woman who has more two children (while still getting welfare checks), should be sterilised.
 

everybody SHOULD care!!!! (0.00 / 0)
It is the responsibility of both parties to get protection.  Birth controll is part of that.  Pharmacies have no right to stop women from getting what they need.

[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Bookmark and Share

Poll
Would kind of likely reform would you support?
Baucus plan, with or without public option
Baucus plan, but only with public option
I don't support the Baucus plan, period

Results

Blog Roll
  • 4 & 20 Blackbirds
  • A Secular Franciscan Life
  • Big Sky Blog
  • Cece-in-MT
  • David Crisp's Billings Blog
  • David Sirota
  • Discovering Urbanism
  • Ecorover
  • Granny Insanity
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Intelligent Discontent
  • Lamnidae
  • Lesley's Podcast
  • Livingston, I Presume
  • Great Falls Firefly
  • Montana Main St.
  • Montana Maven
  • Montana Netroots
  • Montana Politics
  • Montana With kids
  • Patia Stephens
  • Piece of Mind
  • Pragmatic Revolt
  • Prairie Mary
  • Rebels Are We
  • Speedkill
  • Sporky
  • The Alberton Papers
  • The Fighting Liberal
  • The Montana Capitol Blog
  • The Montana Misanthrope
  • Thoughts From the Middle of Nowhere
  • Treasure State Judaism
  • Writing and the West
  • Wrong Dog's Life Chest
  • Wulfgar!

  • Powered by: SoapBlox