Posts Tagged ‘women’s health’

“Am I the only one who thinks government-mandated health care telling me that my children are ‘targeted diseases’ is utterly revolting?”  This is a fair question asked by Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life.

To what is Kristin referring?  The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), at the recommendation of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) has decided to re-define women’s health care, mandating that by 1-1-13 insurance providers give women a range of new “preventative services” free, no co-pay or deductible.

These “preventative services” are to include all FDA-approved birth control.  This means even proven abortion-causing drugs such as ella and Plan B.  To be given “free” to married or unmarried women.  So, with Kristin, I ask: Since when is pregnancy a “disease”?

On July 19, the IOM released a Consensus Report: “The IOM defines preventative health services as measures — including medications, procedures, devices, tests, education and counseling — shown to improve well-being, and/or decrease the likelihood or delay the onset of a targeted disease or condition.”  Under these conditions, insured women will have access to free birth control because pregnancy has been redefined as a ‘targeted disease.”

This presidential administration wants women to have free access to abortion and cancer-causing birth control in order to fight the “disease” of pregnancy, notes Kristin, yet “medication that literally keeps my 2-1/2 year old son, Gunner, from dying costs my husband and me hundreds [of dollars] every month.”  Gunner has cystic fibrosis.

HHS announced new preventive-care guidelines will require all health insurance policies written on or after August 1, 2012, to offer contraceptives and other women’s health services without copays, coinsurance, or deductibles.  Included in the guidelines are voluntary sterilization procedures, breastfeeding support and equipment, annual well-woman visits, counseling on HIV and sexually transmitted diseases and screenings for human papillomavirus, or HPV, gestational diabetes, and domestic violence.

There are many individuals and organizations who protest on moral, ethical and economic grounds.  Supposedly, “religious” employers may “opt out” of the mandate.  However, NARAL — the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws — is urging its members to write HHS, saying, “I am concerned that certain religious employers may be allowed to opt out of the requirements.  All women should have access to contraceptive coverage, regardless of where they work.”  Has NARAL forgotten?  Birth control is widely available and publicly funded programs already provide it for women who cannot afford it.

Is pregnancy a “disease?”

Pregnancy is the carrying of one or more offspring.  New human life.  To be pregnant means to be “with child.”  Every child is fearfully and wonderfully made by God.  Every child is knit together in the secret place of his or her mother’s womb.  Within the womb, and not by accident, the placenta nestles around the child to nurture and protect.

Pregnancy is not a disease.  Were it true, what would that make each of us?

Read Full Post »

Experts in New Zealand praise the healthy habit of self-control.  Those with common sense respond, “Well, duh!”

New scientific research shows that if adults cultivate the practice of self-control — starting early — in children, a great many could be saved from addictions, poverty, and crime.  Isn’t that just like scientific evidence?  Always lagging behind but, when pure, testifying to God’s order of creation.

This ezerwoman is a better helper — of men, children, and society — when I practice self-control.  Lest I forget (or resist), God consistently reminds me to be “self-controlled.”  The books of 1 and 2 Timothy refer to the virtue of “self-control” at least four times.  At least five times, the book of Titus instructs older men and women to practice and mentor “self-control.”  There’s good reason.  Self-control glorifies God.  It can result in more hopeful consequences.  It can even reduce depression

Self-control is the opposite of living our lives however we please.  Doing whatever makes us “happy.”  Insisting that our “needs” be met.  Serving self over others.   Perhaps this is what happens when times are good.  We give ourselves license… for whatever, whenever.   We have (in my American lifetime) “lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence” (James 5:5).  For sure, it is what happens when women are encouraged to let their emotions rule.

But, encouraging girls and young women to let their emotions rule has not made them happy.  It is widely reported, writes Dennis Prager, that women suffer depression at twice the rate of men.  If the clinical assumptions are true, Prager suggests that we consider the following:

“Wise cultures have learned that happiness is attained only when we conquer our nature.  This is true for male and female.  With modern feminism, however, came a belief in the superiority of the female nature.  The result?  Society was urged to suppress both the negative and positive aspects of the male nature with little or no suppression of the female nature.  Historically, societies and parents have always known it’s a good thing to teach boys to control two aspects of their male nature — their sexual desires and their predilection for violence.  Decent men were taught from youth to touch a woman sexually only with her permission and to channel physical aggression into sports or into helping fight evil by joining the police force or military.  Men who didn’t learn to control these aspects of male nature not only became bad men, but unhappy men.”

He continues, “Societies and parents also knew it was important to help girls control their natures — in particular, their predilection to be ruled by their emotions.  Women who allowed their emotions to rule them not only became destructive (to members of their families first and foremost), they became unhappy women.  But, while modern society continued to teach boys to control themselves, it stopped teaching girls to do so.  Girls’ emotions and feelings were treated as inherently valuable.  In fact, to repress a girl’s emotions or feelings was labeled ‘sexist’ and showed a ‘hatred of women.’ ”  (Excerpted from “Wanted by women: A few good old-fashioned men” by Dennis Prager, The Washington Times, 6-30-08)

Hmmm.  I’m reminded of the woman who showed up at an abortion clinic.  Why?  “He kissed me and I melted.  I was filled with passion and couldn’t help myself.  Now, I’m pregnant and must take control of my body.”

Lack of self control + unhappy woman = desperation and hopelessness.  Ugh.

There is another choice.   Mature men and women can be examples of self-control and mentor younger ones to do the same.  There is promise in such practice: Hope for living out our lives in anticipation of Jesus’ return (Titus 2).

Read Full Post »

Not many people I know like abortion.  Those who support it as a “choice” or “right” claim they want to make abortion “safe, legal, and rare.”  Seems to me they’ve failed with two of their three goals.

They’ve failed to make abortion “safe.”  Planned Parenthood, Dr. Leroy Carhart and other abortion providers have certainly not made abortion any safer than it was when so-called “back-alley” abortions were performed.   Abortion is, after all, either a surgery or chemical.   The littlest person involved is always sacrificed by way of death.  I fear women are sacrificed as well, some dying and many others placed at risk emotionally and/or spiritually.

They’ve failed to make abortion “rare.”  Planned Parenthood and other so-called “health clinics” that promote sexual intimacy among teens are certainly not making abortion rare.  Doubt me?  Visit TeenWire, Planned Parenthood’s site for teens, and come to your own conclusion.  Do you think the message of “do whatever feels right” would decrease or increase not only abortion but sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, and AIDS?  Set young people up for a fall?  Create a self-perpetuating business… for certain federally-funded “women’s health clinics”?

Ahhh… but Planned Parenthood and their associates in business have certainly been successful in making abortion legal.  But, who stands to gain?  Who loses?

I don’t subscribe to the belief that women need abortion to bring some “control” to their lives.  The highest percentage of women who become pregnant choose to engage in the procreational act of sex.  Nor do I subscribe to the mantra that “teens are going to do ‘it’ anyway, so let’s make it safe.”  This is foolishness!  What school principal would inform students how to steal without getting caught?  Binge eat and purge?  Drink, do drugs, or smoke responsibly?

I believe each person is of great value in God’s sight; therefore, deserving of my protection and honest words of warning.  Contrary to what Margaret Sanger and Alfred Kinsey believed, human beings are capable of self-restraint.  We don’t have to be ruled by emotions and desires.  We aren’t, after all, made in the image of animals.  We are capable of thinking.  Reasoning.  Dreaming.  Building relationships.  Serving others.  Bearing burdens.  Preparing for the future.  Being patient.  And making choices that lead away from despair and, instead, toward hope.

I choose life over death.  Therefore, I choose not to send boys and girls out into the street to play or herd them toward the edge of a cliff, but instead, stand in their way saying “No!”  “Stop!”  “Turn around!”  I choose not to help them find holes in protective fences, but instead, repair the broken gate.

I choose not to squelch the natural rebelliousness of youth, but to use it to resist everything that is wrong in this world.  Including Planned Parenthood.

Read Full Post »

My personal “tour guide” at Planned Parenthood was friendly.  I did not doubt that she genuinely believed she was part of an organization that wanted to help women.  However, two-thirds of the “tour” was was spent explaining where the client has her abortion and how long it takes her to recover before leaving by way of the side door.

So, Planned Parenthood: “Fess up!  You benefit from multiple private donors, yet you fight tooth and nail for my tax dollars.  Why is it so important that government fund and, thereby, endorse you?

My “tour” of Planned Parenthood was many years ago.  It — and countless conversations with women who left your clinics by the side door — influenced me to warn mothers and daughters away from your place of business.  I have read your brochures, become familiar with your recommended textbooks and classroom topics, studied your reports, and visited your web site for teens.  You do not view men, women, relationships, marriage, or family as God does.

So, come clean Planned Parenthood and “fess up!

If you’re all about women’s health care, why do you:

  • Teach the “art and science” of premarital sex to elementary, middle and high school children?
  • Encourage boys and girls to “test their sex savvy” and engage in interactive games such as “Jim Dandy and His Very Gay Day”?
  • Tell boys and girls that even though their parents may not understand, any sexual activity is “normal” as long as the two people involved “give” and “receive pleasure”?
  • Teach the “ABCDs of LGBT Dating” (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender)?
  • Help child predators by covering up illegal sexual activity, child abuse, and statutory rape?
  • Drive a wedge between parents and children?
  • Promote promiscuity and sexual disorders?  (Note: My conscience does not allow me to include quotes or paraphrases from Planned Parenthood publications and web sites.  I invite my readers to do their own research and have included sources.)
  • Mislead adolescents and teens with the idea of “safer sex”?
  • Perpetuate the lie that you are a “health care” organization when, in one year alone (2001), you dispensed 458,892 emergency contraception kits (“morning after pill”), performed 213,026 surgical abortions and 25,000 chemical abortions, but in your nearly 900 “health centers” saw only 15,618 clients for prenatal care (1 for every 13 abortion clients) and made only 1,951 adoption referrals (1 for every 109 abortion clients)?

“Fess up, Planned Parenthood!  If you’re all about women’s health care, why don’t you:

  • Show expectant moms the ultrasound of their baby?
  • Inform women that abortion may be legal, but it is not necessarily safe?
  • Applaud the work of caring pregnancy centers that affirm the physical, psychological, and spiritual wellness of girls and women before, during, and after pregnancy as well as to mothers grieving their aborted children — all without government assistance?  (In 1997, I co-founded one of these caring pregnancy centers in my community and continue to serve as a volunteer, mentor, and board president.)
  • Warn women about the connection between abortion and breast cancer?
  • Help build relationships between girls and their parents rather than circumventing parental notification laws?
  • Admit that you practice a form of eugenics even today by intentionally setting up your clinics in the more impoverished parts of town and, percentage-wise, aborting more black children than white children?
  • Admit that you actively lobby for abortion rights and pursue your own interests?  (In 2006, PP hired Cecile Richards [the daughter of Ann Richards, former governor of Texas] as president.  Her experience is not in health care at all, but in political action.  Her previous work as as a union organizer, as the founder of “Texas Freedom network” [formed to battle pro-life groups in Texas], as director of pro-choice projects for the Turner Foundation, and as founder and president of America Votes, a coalition of 32 of the biggest and richest unions and liberal interest groups in the country.)

Planned Parenthood, one of your own clinic directors has been quoted, saying, “If Planned Parenthood had no abortion, it would see its soul unravel.”  (Thomas Webber, former director of PP of Minnesota/South Dakota, The (St. Paul) Pioneer Press, July 27, 2000).

SOURCES: Teenwire.com, Planned Parenthood, Childpredators.com, Pro-Life Action Ministries, STOPP International, Life Dynamics, The Eliott Institute, Silent No More, Word of Hope, The Lighthouse, Ramah International, Lutherans For Life, and Concerned Women for America, Dr. Joe McIlhaney, Dr. Miriam Grossman, and Dr. Meg Meeker — for starters!

Read Full Post »

Was Dr. Mary Wood-Allen, the author of my grandmother’s book, able to see into the future?  No, but when she wrote about taking care of the body, I believe she was thinking generationally.  Let’s fast forward to the words of another woman physician.

Miriam Grossman, M.D., also believes that the body deserves respect and care.  That’s because she sees — up close and personally — how complex the human body really is.

Dr. Grossman is a campus psychiatrist who meets with countless young women.  It is the fear, anger, and depression of these young women that motivated her to write the book Unprotected.  This short and politically-incorrect book is a must-read for young women in high school and college.  It is a must-read for young men who hope to someday marry a woman.  It is a must read for parents.

Consider the topic of sexually transmitted diseases, HPV in particular.  HPV (human papilloma virus) often catches young women by surprise.  There is emotional fallout.  Trauma.  What is a girl to do?  Damage control kicks in at student health centers.  Pamphlets explain that “HPV infection is very common . . . almost everyone gets HPV at some time . . . having only a single lifetime partner does not assure protection . . .  anyone who has ever had sexual relations has a high chance of being exposed to this virus . . . most men and women are infected with HPV at some time in their lives.”

With these “calming” words, observes Dr. Grossman, young women with a serious and possibly life-threatening disease are led to believe that “everyone’s in the same boat,” so “chill out, and welcome to the club.”

But, writes Dr. Grossman, “these reassurances are inaccurate, and do no favor to women: in fact, infection with HPV is completely preventable.  It is not an inevitable consequence of becoming sexually active.  It is not something that will happen sooner or later.  Even if well-intentioned, to imply otherwise is misleading.

“This may not be popular to talk about, but there exists a population of young women and men who do not have to worry about HPV.  Or, for that matter, about herpes, chlamydia, or HIV.  They are safe because they wait, and marry someone else who waited.  Yes, it can be done; people have been known to survive and tell others about it.  Medicine should be studying them, and how they avoid risky behaviors, then applying that knowledge to our reproductive health education campaigns.  Instead, there is an odd approach in sexual health: instead of asking our youth to strive for self-control and smart choices, we assume they’ll make poor choices and have multiple partners including some they hardly know.  Why else would every pamphlet and Web site advise them, ‘First, talk with your partner.’  It’s as if whoever’s composing this material has given up on standards, and expects the behavior of the lowest common denominator.”

Dr. Grossman quotes a doctor who, on an HPV support site, is trying to provide words of comfort.   He put it this way:  “. . . Sex is simply one of the many ways in which humans interact with one another.  All those interactions involve sharing bacteria, viruses, etc.”

“What?” asks Dr. Grossman.  “One of the many ways in which humans interact with one another?  Is that the message we want to give to young people?”

Dr. Miriam Grossman, like Dr. Mary Wood-Allen before her, doesn’t want young women (or men) to be at risk.  She doesn’t settle for risk reduction but presses for risk elimination.  And, lest you missed it, neither of these women physicians of 1898 or 2011 seems to find benefit in tiptoeing around or worrying about “judging.”   If we talk to young people about healthier eating and not smoking, using drugs, or drinking and driving, then shouldn’t we also talk to them honestly about the consequences of sexual bonding outside of faithful and Biblical marriage?

Unprotected is a quick read.  Please toss political correctness to the wind and purchase a copy.

Read Full Post »

On October 7, 2010, I posted a blog entitled “Breast Cancer & Abortion.”  Here are a few more quotes to ponder:

“I would have loved to have found no association between breast cancer and abortion, but our research is rock solid, and our data is accurate.”  (Dr. Janet Daling, a cancer epidemiologist who supports legal abortion, quoted in Breakpoint, 10-28-10)

“In 2007, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons found that women who have an abortion increase by 40 percent their risk of breast cancer.”  (Breakpoint, 10-28-10)

“Many Americans who buy those pink bracelets may not be aware of the strong links between Planned Parenthood and the Komen Foundation.  Komen founder Nancy Brinker once served on the advisory board of Planned Parenthood of Dallas.  One Komen Advisory Board member, Eve Sanchez Silver, resigned when she found out just how strong the link was between Komen and the nation’s number one abortion provider.  Shockingly, Silver says the Komen Foundation’s “Concern for the health of women is now parallel to Planned Parenthood’s concern for the health of the children they abort.”  Those are strong words.  The Komen Foundation also endorses embryonic stem cell research which kills human embryos.”  (Breakpoint, 10-28-10)

If you want to help decrease the breast cancer risk and support research, check out the Polycarp Research Institute or the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute.

Read Full Post »

October is breast cancer awareness month.  I’m all for fighting breast cancer.  My mother, aunt, and cousin all died from breast cancer.  I don’t want to.  This summer, my niece discovered she has breast cancer.  I want her to grow beautifully old with grandchildren.

For all these reasons, I’m grateful for cancer research and physicians with resolve to battle the disease.  But, I’m also confused.

Why would organizations known for fighting breast cancer team up with organizations that abort babies and put women at higher risk of breast cancer?

Susan G. Komen is a successful organization that raises awareness of breast cancer as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars for research and hope of finding a cure.  But, Susan G. Komen also gives hundreds of thousands of dollars to Planned Parenthood (PP).  PP is the world’s largest provider of abortions.

Dr. Joel Brind is a Professor of Human Biology and Endocrinology at Baruch College, the City University of New York and president of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute in Poughkeepsie, NY.  He has been conducting research on diseases related to reproductive steroid hormones since 1972.    Dr. Brind links the long history of peer reviewed medical research establishing the breast cancer and abortion link.  Google or Bing Joel Brind.  Watch one of his YouTube videos.  Or, google or Bing David Reardon at the Elliot Institute.  You can order the brochure, “Breast Cancer: Risks and Choices” from Heritage House www.hh76.com

How does abortion ultimately cause breast cancer?  Almost all of the risk factors which are known to increase the risk of breast cancer are associated with some kind of excess exposure to the main female sex steroid hormone, estrogen.  The biggest surge of estrogen occurs in the first tirmester of pregnancy.  Estrogen goes sky high.  That’s okay because although it stimulates the growth of the breasts, toward the end of the pregnancy other hormones kick in that make the breast tissue mature, which also kill off cells that are not needed.  Once the mature cells are ready to produce milk, they aren’t in a growing mode.  They are less likely to be subject to the mutogenic or initiating effects of carcinogens (the substances that produce cancer).  The carcinogens will affect cells which basically can grow.

If a woman has an abortion during the first 32 weeks of pregnancy, she gets all of these growth-promoting effects on the tissues because of the big surge of estrogen.  Without the differentiating and maturing effects of the later hormones, the net result is the opposite of what we would find in a full-term pregancy.  It’s know that a full-term pregnancy early in a woman’s reproductive life is protective against breast cancer.  But an early abortion does not offer that protection and, instead, works the other way and increases the risk.  The extra estrogen ultimately causes abnormal cells to grow into full blown cancer.

A miscarriage, on the other hand, is a natural termination — much different from an induced abortion.  Most pregnancies that end in miscarriage don’t produce the same high levels of estrogen as are produced by a normal pregnancy.  (Read more in “Breast Cancer: Risks and Choices”)

RU 486, the chemical abortion, does nothing to neutralize the effects of pregnancy hormones up until the time of the abortion; therefore, it will have the same effect on future breast cancer risk as surgical abortion.

I hope that women who have had or are considering an abortion will do some research and discover very serious risks to their health.

In the meantime, I’m left wondering.  Why don’t the organizations that fight breast cancer speak up about the risks of abortion?  Why would an organization like Susan G. Komen want to donate large amounts of money to Planned Parenthood?  Why would an organization that wants to save the lives of women not be troubled about donating to a business that ends the lives of babies and puts the mothers of those babies at serious risk of breast cancer?

It doesn’t make any sense.  None at all.

(For a 30-minute video entitled “Komen’s Dark Side,” go to www.lifeissues.org/AbortionBreastCancer/komen/index.htm )

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts