Often termed as a neo-Freudian, Karen Horney is considered a pioneer in the field of psychology, in which at one point she was convinced that the field of psychology itself was predominately androcentric. With hopes of changing the face of psychology − to something that related more to the social and cultural attitudes of women − it wasn’t long before she took a position against classical theorist Sigmund Freud. In her work, she writes extensively about womb envy, the antithesis of the classical Freudian concept of penis envy. Although this is really only the tip of the iceberg of the great contributions Horney ensued in personality theory, her dedication to the subject earned her the distinction of creating a separate branch of psychology: feminine psychology.

From Horney’s point of view, psychology did not devote enough attention to womanhood. In fact, she often characterized women with feelings of inferiority due to the overt and long-held displays of patriarchy. Women are not born with this state of mind, but are rather socialized to feel inadequate to men. Thus, Horney asserted that the basis of personality and development is not biological, and that social and cultural factors are likely to result from inhibited impulses. These assumptions by Horney were verified through her own personal experiences not only as a mother, but also as a clinical researcher. In some cases, Horney concurred, women were very resistant to their sexuality. She claimed that this was, again, due to women’s desire to compete with men in positions of power and success in the workplace.

Perhaps what earned Horney the most fame was her continuous opposition to Freudian theory and its disregard to the life course. Even though her response heeded great criticism, her basis of interpretation on the present factors of the human condition − from birth until the present − compared to Freud and his often infant-based theories, Horney appeared to be more interested in the function and the complexity and diversity of development. During that time, both Freud and Horney were interested in understanding neurotic trends of their patients and were in constant conflict regarding their beliefs. Whether or not their hypotheses and scientific work were correct, there is no doubt that feminine psychology has made great strides in our current understanding of personality theory.

Inasmuch as both researchers, Freud and Horney, disagreed, it is true that feminine psychology still has relevance to the field of psychology today. Feminine psychology and its orientation are highly applicable to today’s movements that work to include women in biomedical research. Interestingly, women have been denied participation in biomedical research. This movement, which stressed the importance of women’s health as a separate entity sees, like Karen Horney did, that women have not only psychological experiences that differ, but also many social and cultural factors that contribute to their health disparities. Based on this, we can also assume that male bias has also dominated the field of medicine equivocally.

A more accurate adage perhaps states that history doesn’t repeat – it rhymes. That is, although it is arguable that human traits such as greed, hatred, curiosity (or a lack thereof), and a desire for fairness may produce predictable results, as how one anticipates the next note of a song, it will be a more or less different result each time. Furthermore, the result may be for better or worse, and we have witnessed the fruits of each, from the horrors of the Spanish Inquisition to the marvels of the Renaissance, from ethnic cleansing to the Civil Rights Act.

The challenge of this century is to produce more of the latter and less of the former. Everyday I scan the news and see more of the same – incessant nonsense from the GOP debates and the uncritical puppet-like coverage by big media, attacks on civil rights in the form of unnecessary and discriminatory voter ID laws, legislation after legislation introduced that would restrict the right of women and girls to control their own bodies, legislation that would label whistleblowers as terrorists, cuts to vital social programs, lobbyists infiltrating the government and insisting on the wonders of a gigantic oil pipeline stretching from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. military spending still growing despite the fact that it makes up over half the U.S. budget and is greater than that of all other nations combined, the Tucson school district will ban books reminding children of their ethnic heritage, exploding health care costs, skyrocketing tuition, and corporate executives’ income growing at an accelerated rate despite stagnating growth for the middle class and one out of four people falling into poverty.

Now you may be reading this and already feel resigned to surrender, but activism doesn’t always entail monumental acts of courage. Simply by staying educated, relaying what one has learned, and being civically engaged can one shift the cultural discourse and even change the course of history. The power of the citizenry has been observed in the past with Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s presenting the Declaration of Sentiments at Seneca Falls as well as today with citizen outcry and online protests stopping SOPA and PIPA in their tracks. Just by telling my little cousin that she can be an engineer or my nephew that sensitivity is present in both men and women, that may free them from their own prisons, if not the prisons of society (although they will be full-grown members of society one day, and I hope they will be more respectful of differences than previous generations). Speaking of full-grown members of society, I also feel the percentage of voters in this country is woefully low, and those that do too often know less than those that don’t. It is not my place to tell people who to vote for, but whether one is looking for fundamental and immediate change at the local level, steady change at the national level, or just continuation of the status quo, the important thing is to vote and vote wisely. (This may be a good place to start – http://votesmart.org/.) In any event, in the grand scheme of things none of this may matter, but in this life it does, as well as in the lifetimes of future generations, so here’s to freedom, justice, and prosperity.

In regards to the health care system, the United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that does not offer universal health care, that is, health care coverage for all citizens (Harper, 2009). In addition, the United States ranks 21st in the OECD in individual income tax rates at 39.76%, in comparison to Denmark with a 59.74% tax rate and the Slovak Republic with a 19% tax rate (Atkins, 2007). To clarify, public health care and taxes (which fund many social programs such as education) are merely general indicators of the extent of collectivism and may not be accurate alone since low tax rates can be indicative of a poor economy rather than individualistic society. However, a Gallup poll in 2011, reveals that 47% of adults favor repealing the health care reform law passed in 2010 – the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – whereas 42% favored keeping it in place. Furthermore, fifty-six percent of U.S. citizens say they prefer a system based on private insurance while 39% prefer a government-run system (Newport, 2011).

Notwithstanding, according to the Pew Research Center, when asked about the social safety net in 2007, 54% agreed that the government should help more needy people whereas 40% disagreed, 69% agreed that the government should guarantee food and shelter for all while 29% disagreed, and 69% agreed that the government should take care of people who cannot care for themselves whereas 28% disagreed (Morin & Neidorf). Thus, one might conclude that the United States is divided on issues of collectivistic social welfare and tends to be somewhat more individualistic when compared to other industrialized nations.

At a smaller scale – the family – one can also observe increasing individualization. In 1960, 72% of all adults were married. By comparison, 52% were married in 2008 (Pew Social Trends, 2010). Despite respondents also being more accepting of various living arrangements and placing high value on family life, the trend indicates nonconformity which is characteristic of individualism. In addition, from 1981 to 1997, household conversations dropped 100% (that is, the average family spent 0 hours per week primarily talking as a family in 1997) and children spent an average of 45 minutes per week talking with someone in the family. In 1995, daily family dinners occurred in one-third of families (Doherty).

Perhaps not coincidentally, in 2000, the average U.S. resident logged 1,978 work hours, longer than any other industrialized country including Japan, Germany, and Canada (Anderson, 2001). Moreover, perhaps as a result of spending less time with the family, 53% of young adults aged 18-29 and 58% of all adults go online for no specific reason other than simply for fun or to pass the time (Rainie, 2011).

For many, religious congregations represent community. Nonetheless, 39% of the U.S. population attended religious services weekly in 2007 (Pond, et al., 2010). In terms of philosophy, 58% of U.S. citizens believe that the freedom to pursue life’s goals is more important than the state guaranteeing that nobody is in need whereas 35% believe that the latter is more important. By comparison, 30% of Spaniards believe that the freedom to pursue life’s goals is more important and 67% believe it is more important that the state guarantee nobody is in need. Further illuminating attitudes about the power of the individual in the United States, 36% of respondents agree with the statement that “success in life is determined by forces outside our control” while 72% of Germans agreed with that statement (Pew Global, 2011). This can perhaps be credited to Benjamin Franklin’s thoughts on the benefits of hard work and thrift espoused in his popular pamphlet Poor Richard’s Almanack (Davidson). Familiar aphorisms include “a penny saved is a penny earned” and “time is money”, indicating that anyone can “make it” if they work hard and are frugal.

People are also having less social capital. According to Robert Putnam (1995), labor union membership has been dropping for decades, participation in the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) has fallen from 12 million in 1964 to 7 million in 1995, membership in civic organizations such as the League of Women Voters and Boy Scouts has decreased significantly, and a majority of bowlers are literally bowling alone rather than in leagues.

Additionally, it is important to consider attitudes toward the environment in determining to what extent a society is community-oriented or individualistic, as a community-oriented society may tend to view itself as interdependent and hence put the interests of the community (and by extension the preservation of nature) above the individual while members of an individualistic society may view themselves as independent and place self-interests above that of the community (Myers, 2009). In light of this, when gas prices reached record levels in 2008, 47% thought that it was more important to expand oil exploration, mining, and construction of power plants than to conserve and regulate energy whereas 45% thought the latter was more important (Pew Research, 2008).

As data can help generate an understanding of society objectively in general, examining people’s modes of thinking and behavior can help in understanding society on a more individual, interactionist level in terms of its individualism and/or collectivism. From the latter approach, Karen Sternheimer in her book Celebrity Culture and the American Dream (2011) makes the case that enamored with achieving “reality” television and stardom. Perhaps due to the wealth gap and lack of opportunities in the “real” world, people are looking to make it to the top by just being themselves (rather than working to close up the wealth gap for the benefit of all). The perceived social mobility is perhaps an illusion but is especially appealing considering the age of the internet which gives people a global forum with which to advertise themselves. In other words, it seems doable. Plus, celebrity life is extremely glamorized in U.S. society and ergo people want to be a part it. Whether intentional or accidental, individualism is by extension also glamorized as admirers want to be admired and stand out as the special individuals they are. Competition is thus fostered as well and people may go to extreme lengths to get what they believe they deserve. This is in contrast to collective societies where identities, esteem, and goals is bound with that of other members of the community (Myers, 2009, p. 24-27).

While positive self-regard tends to be less important to collective societies and members use the word “I” less frequently (Kashima & Kashima as cited by Myers), people in the U.S. are arguably obsessed about personal appearance. According to Bernard McGrane (1994), when people look in what he calls the “looking glass self”, how they see their reflections is different from what is actually there, that is, they are likely to be overly critical of their physical appearances (and it is perhaps no coincidence that businesses, itself based on a individualistic capitalist model, make huge profits from this type of self-critical individualism). Thus, when people see others without clothes, it is “nudity”, whereas when they themselves are without clothes, it is “nakedness”.

Lastly, the value placed upon individualism in U.S. inhabitants can further be observed in their choices of clothing. For many, clothing represents a special sense of identity and can reveal much about people and their culture and/or subculture. Fred Davis in his chapter “Of Maids’ Uniforms and Blue Jeans” discusses ways in which class, social status, ambiguity, and creativity. Considering the general lack of class consciousness in the U.S., clothing, particularly blue jeans, may instead take on the role of ambiguity as jeans are worn by both the wealthy and impoverished. Despite the tendency to underdress in the U.S., which one might interpret as uniformity, the similar style of dress across demographics may in fact symbolize a multitude of meanings including but not limited to leisure, democracy, independence, freedom, equality, fraternity, antiestablishmentarianism, conservativism, and anti-fashion. Thus, ironically, the “democratization” of blue jeans can itself a form of individualistic self-expression. Some might even take this creativity further by purchasing jeans that are faded, fringed, worn, or with brand name labels and ornamentation.

Considering all the aforementioned evidence of individualistic tendencies among the U.S. populace, one might be quick to conclude that the U.S. is indeed an individualistic society. However, one might also notice that society is split on many issues. According to David G. Myers (2009), labeling a society as purely individualist or collectivist oversimplifies the multidimensional nature of a society, since the tendencies can vary from one person to another and most people exhibit one or the other at different times and places. In addition, some regional cultures in the U.S. may be more collectivist as in Hawaii whereas others more individualist such as in Montana; and conservatives can be individualistic when it comes to regulation of business but collectivistic concerning abortion on the other hand while liberals conversely are broadly collectivists in terms of social welfare, for instance, but individualists regarding reproductive choice (Myers, 2009, p. 25). To sum up, society is neither black nor white but grey, and in the case of U.S. society, it is neither purely individualist nor collectivist but leans toward the former.

REFERENCES

Anderson, P. (2001). Study: U.S. employees put in most hours.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/trends/08/30/ilo.study/

Atkins, C. (2007). In OECD Comparison of Wage Taxes, U.S.

Ranking Would Slip Badly if 2001 Tax Cuts Expired. Retrieved from http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/22469.html

Craib, I. (1997). Classical Social Theory. New York: Oxford

University Press

Davidson, V. M. The Frugal Wisdom of Benjamin Franklin:

Insightful Quotations on Thrift, Hard Work, and Money. Retrieved from http://www.frugal-cafe.com/frugal-op-ed/articles/ben-franklin-quotes1.html

Davis, F. (1996). The Production of Reality. NY: Sage

Publications

Doherty, W. J. OVERSCHEDULED KIDS, UNDERCONNECTED FAMILIES.

Retrieved from

http://www.puttingfamilyfirst.org/research.php

Harper, K. (2009). The United States does not have the best

health care system in the world. Retrieved from http://www.examiner.com/progressive-politics-in-national/the-united-states-does-not-have-the-best-health-care-system-the-world

McGrane, B. (1994). The Un-TV and the 10mph Car. NY: Small Press

Morin, R., & Neidorf, S. (2007). Surge in Support for Social

Safety Net. Retrieved from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/467/social-safety-net

Myers, D. G. (2009). Exploring Social Psychology. New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Newport, F. (2011). Americans Tilt Toward Favoring Repeal of

Healthcare Law. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/150773/Americans-Tilt-Toward-Favoring-Repeal-Healthcare-Law.aspx

Pew Global. (2011). The American-Western European Values Gap.

Retrieved from http://www.pewglobal.org/2011/11/17/the-american-western-european-values-gap/1/

Pew Research Center. (2008). Gas Prices Pump Up Support for

Drilling. Retrieved from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/884/gas-prices

Pew Social Trends. (2010). The Decline of Marriage And Rise of

New Families. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/11/18/the-decline-of-marriage-and-rise-of-new-families/

Pond, A., Smith, G., & Clement, S. (2010). Religion Among the

Millennials. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/Age/Religion-Among-the-Millennials.aspx

Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social

Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.

Rainie, L. (2011). The internet as a diversion and destination.

Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Internet-as-diversion.aspx?src=prc-headline

Sternheimer, K. (2011). Celebrity Culture & the American Dream.

NY: Routledge

To start, as Durkheim was a positivist (or quantitative, in general, studying facts and figures) and Max Weber was more of an anti-positivist (i.e. qualitative, studying the individual), their theories largely reflect these distinct frameworks. Durkheim focused on what he called “social facts” which are supposed to be objective “things” and which are determined by statistics (Craib 1997: 27). Weber, the other hand, focused on social action and the individual (Craib 1997: 45). From these starting points, these two theorized about society and social structures. Durkheim considered solidarity, that is, what holds a society together, and he proposed the concepts of “mechanical solidarity” and “organic solidarity” (Craib 1997: 65) Mechanical solidarity includes very little division of labor, as in kin groups, and organic solidarity involves a highly developed division of labor, as in the market system, and these “social facts” can be observed through the legal system. Further, mechanical solidarity is distinguishable by “repressive law,” in which residents are punished for violations of the moral code, called the “conscious collective” by Durkheim. Durkheim argues that moral action “seeks the common good over and above that of the individual and it is directed towards others in accordance with society’s ideals and values” (Craib 1997: 76). This forms social and system integration which Dukheim claims shapes and limits the individual (Weber would disagree which will be discussed later). In organic solidarity, not only is there supposedly greater economic prosperity due to the large-scale division of labor, but it unites different people as they share common purposes. Additionally, in organic solidarity, its external manifestation is not “repressive law” but “restitutive law,” identified by concern with restoring social contracts and compensation for violating the contract. However, these types of solidarity imply an ideal state which has arguably never existed. Hence, Dukheim described what he called “abnormal divisions of labor” (Craib 1997: 68) which take the forms of class conflict (which is a result of industrialization outpacing the development of rules for the market), forced division of labor (where people are misallocated in the job sector due to inequalities), and managerial deficiency (i.e. poorly organized enterprises).

By constrast, Weber speaks of communal and associative relationships as the basis of social cohesion. Communal relationships involve a group of individual actors viewing themselves as belonging to each other and act accordingly, such as familial relationships whereas associative relationships entail self-interest or personal values, for example, the relationships within a trade union or school. Regarding individual social action, Weber strays from Durkheim’s position on society dictating the individual actions and instead emphasizes the primacy of individual agency. Weber lists four kinds of social actions which vary in meaningfulness and rationality: 1) traditional action (which is ritualistic and borderline rational), 2) “purely affectual” action (which has more meaning as more control is exerted and is also borderline rational), 3) value-based action (acting in a way that satisfies a personal belief), and 4) rational action (where the ends, means, and secondary results are all taken into account). These actions, according to Weber, are guided by a “legitimate order,” such as laws, and the “validity” of that order is based on the probability that people will follow it.

As opposed to Durkheim who claimed that social conflict arises from “abnormal divisions of labor” and suggested that it can be remedied, Weber asserted that conflict, in terms of war or regulated competition, cannot be eliminated and that it has purpose in supporting the “fit” and filtering out the “unfit” (Craib 1997: 121).

Also distinguished from Durkheim is what Weber says about value freedom. Durkheim suggested that value freedom is merely about eliminating assumptions and considering only social facts. Rather, Weber claims that science is guided by integrity, rigor, clarity, and truth but that these are also based on human values, i.e. “social scientists choose their lines and objects of inquiry by reference to values” (Craib 1997: 52). In other words, both social facts and human values matter and that is true value freedom.

Durkheim and Weber both agree that religion (or beliefs, e.g., political) is central in holding a society together. Durkheim studied the Australian aboriginal religion of totemism which attributed special powers to the totem and this shared belief, or collective representation, tied the society together. Durkheim wrote,

Before all, [religion] is a system of ideas with which the individuals represent to themselves the society of which they are members, and the obscure but intimate relations which they have with it. This is its primary function; and though metaphorical and symbolic, this representation is not unfaithful. (Craib 1997: 70)

Weber studied Confucianism, Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Christianity and notices the universality of the belief in the supernatural. As the beliefs develop, religion obtains autonomy and affects social order through moral codes and rationalizations. In this respect, Weber’s infamous work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism elaborates that Protestant, Puritan, and Calvinist ethic of industriousness gave rise to European capitalism as its rationalization was that worldly success is a sign of God’s grace and salvation (Craib 1997: 253).

In regards to politics, Durkheim argues that a strong central authority without opposition is contingent upon mechanical solidarity and that government organization could neutralize social organization in societies with organic solidarity. In the state, opposition between the governing and governed is central in politics. As societies develop, there is increasing need for individuals to be empowered to prevent the governing to exercise despotic control and the state must provide that empowerment. According to Weber’s take on power, he focuses on class, status, party, leadership, and domination. Weber defines class as based on property, i.e. those who own property and the means of production have power over those who don’t. Furthermore, classes are groups that share the same chances of obtaining goods, living conditions, and life experiences (Craib 1997: 128). Status and “status situation” are defined by “social honor” and esteem. This is different from class in that it is not necessarily associated with economic standing, as a priest may be of a low class but with high status. Also affecting status is educational attainment and profession. Durkheim asserted that a professional group can form its own values and norms whereas Weber insisted that the groups merely pursue their own self-interest in the market. With political parties, Weber did not believe they could drive social or economic reform, whether they were concerned with gaining money and power or principle, which would end up the same as the former through bureaucratic processes (Craib 1997: 132). In terms of leadership and domination, Weber discussed “charismatic leadership,” “traditional domination,” and “legal-rational domination.” Charismatic leadership is distinguished by the charisma a person has which allows that person to lead, especially in times of crisis (Craib 1997: 133-134). An example of traditional domination is patriarchism where there the father has power simply by means of tradition. As for legal-rational domination, there is a legal and administrative order which has binding authority over the people and can use force if legally sanctioned. In addition, this state is legitimate only if people believe it is legitimate (Craib 1997: 38). One manifestation of legal-rational domination is bureaucracy with the following features: organization of functions bound by rules, a sphere of competence, hierarchical organization, staff not owning the means of production and administration, no appropriations of official positions, and all administrative actions and rules are in writing (Craib 1997: 139-141).

Lastly, on modernity, Durkheim viewed it as a movement towards a balanced society joined by the state and a humanist religion where individuals and development of the division of labor are important in contrast to Weber who viewed it as a process of increasing rationality where the biggest threat is a large bureaucracy which would be sped up by socialism and communism and so the free market within a liberal democratic state would be the best defense (Craib 1997: 260).

So how does all this fit in with the situation in Wisconsin? First, one needs to understand what’s in the Wisconsin governor’s “budget repair” bill. Basically, it strips away collective bargaining rights for public sector workers, increases payments for health benefits and pensions, requires unions to re-register with the state every year, restricts access to Medicaid programs and access to public transportation, and hinders broadband internet access to rural communities, effectively making people ill, immobile, and uninformed (Fischer 2011). Furthermore, the governor Scott Walker is funded by the Koch brothers who are conservative billionaires aiming for neoliberal policies, that is, “free market” privatization (Kroll 2011). Even Walker has admitted that his budget plan will not save any money for the state (Jilani 2011). Ergo, the only reason for the bill appears to be the corporatization of society and pleasing the Koch brothers. Walker even threatened to call on the National Guard if workers resisted (Think Progress 2011). In response to this, the fourteen Democratic state senators of Wisconsin fled the state in order to prevent the passing of the bill. Walker then started sending out layoff notices to state employee unions in order to get the senators to return (Kleefeld 2011). However, the Republican state senators removed the fiscal part of the bill which would allow passing it without a quorum. As Walker signed it into law, over 100,000 people protested on the streets of Madison, Wisconsin (Democracy Now, 14 March 2011), teachers went on strike, students walked out of classes, firefighters called for a boycott of a bank that supported Walker, and recall petitions were signed by many thousands (Democracy Now, 11 March 2011).

What Dukheim might say about the current conflict is that it represents social facts as reflected by the legal system in a society of organic solidarity, which has a highly developed division of labor. There is a conscience collective among the unions and people of different walks of life that “seeks the common good over and above that of the individual and it is directed towards others in accordance with society’s ideals and values.” This also relates to restitutive law as the social contracts are broken between the state and public. He would also talk of the abnormal division of labor in which the advancement of capitalism (which Weber would say is a product of the Protestant ethic) has outpaced rules and regulations for it, such as seen by the Koch brothers being allowed to make huge contributions to politicians.

Weber would speak of the associative relationships among the unions and workers as they share a common interest in preserving their livelihoods and are perhaps driven by controlled affectual action, value-based action, and rational action, following the legitimate order. Walker’s bill, on the other hand, does not have legitimacy or validity as the masses are opposing it. The central issue in the situation at hand, Durkheim would argue, is conflict between the governing and governed and that the citizens must be empowered in order to resist the looming despotic control. Weber may further argue that the class conflict is one between the haves – Walker and the Koch Brothers – and the have-nots – the public workers. Though the unions, as a collective actor which Durkheim would say form their own values and which Weber would claim are only after self-interests in the market, may not have the class advantage, they may have the status advantage in Wisconsin. And despite the obvious differences between the Republican and Democratic state senators in Wisconsin, in the end they both chase after power in order to have influence due to the bureaucracy. Also, as Walker is clearly not a charismatic leader nor a patriarchist, he instead gains powers from legal-rational domination. He was voted in and now makes the binding rules and laws, although they are being challenged in court as to determine their legitimacy. This would be aspects of the bureaucracy Weber described. Durkheim might propose that the people of Wisconsin introduce rules and regulations in order to achieve a balance between the state and the individual. Weber, alternatively, would warn against increasing bureaucracy and instead would advocate for the people of Wisconsin take meaningful action in establishing a free market liberal democratic state, i.e. a representative democracy with fair elections alongside the free market.

In closing, Dukheim and Weber are enormously influential in developing sociological thought and their theories and ideas, however similar or dissimilar, have great relevance even in the 21^st century. It would do sociologists and society well to consider their work as the events in Wisconsin unfold and to have an informed opinion about possible solutions.

REFERENCES

Craib, Ian. (1997). Classical Social Theory. New York: Oxford University Press

Democracy Now. (2011). “Worker Uprising: Up to 185,000 Protest in Madison as

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Signs Union-Busting Bill,” March 14.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/14/worker_uprising_up_to_185_000

_____. (2011). “Walkouts, Bank Boycotts and Recalls: Wisconsin Protests Intensify as

Union-Busting Legislation Pushed through State Assembly,” March 11.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/3/11/walkouts_bank_boycotts_and_recalls_wisconsin

Fischer, Brendan. (2011). “What Else is in Walker’s Bill,” February 26.

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2011/02/10139/what-else-walkers-bill

Jilani, Zaid. (2011). “Scott Walker Admits Union-Busting Provision ‘Doesn’t Save Any

Money for the State of Wisconsin,’” April 19. http://www.truth-out.org/scott-walker

admits-union-busting-provision-doesnt-save-any-money-state-wisconsin/1302757200

Kleefeld, Eric. (2011). “Walker Sends Early Layoff Notices – Which Can Be ‘Avoided’ If

Dems Come Back,” March 4. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/walker

sends-early-layoff-notices—-which-can-be-avoided-if-dems-come-back.php

Kroll, Andy. (2011). “Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker: Funded by the Koch Bros,” February

18. http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/02/wisconsin-scott-walker-koch-brothers

Think Progress. (2011). “Wisconsin Gov. Walker Threatens To Deploy National Guard As

‘Intimidation Force’ Against Workers’ Unions,” February 14.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/14/walker-anti-union-bill/

In order to raise funds, participants in the walk must register and raise 50 dollars, which would be easier to do collectively in a group. Therefore, the Unitarian Universalist Church of Anaheim (UUCA) and Orange Coast Unitarian Universalist Church (OCUUC) invited their members to participate and pitch in. The UUCA claims to be a community of “seekers, skeptics, artists, musicians, young, old, gay, straight, from a variety of religious and ethnic backgrounds” (Green). They view diversity as strength and seek understanding, peace, justice, and the improvement of the state of humanity worldwide. They were formed in 1958 as the Unitarian Church of Orange County, merged with the Universalists in 1961, and changed their name to UUCA in 2005 as there were then five UU churches in Orange County. The Orange Coast Unitarian Universalist Church (in Costa Mesa) is also a welcoming community that encompasses diverse cultural backgrounds and works to seek truth, build just communities, and care for one another. It is also self-governed, giving its members a sense of democratic empowerment. Within the church is a group called Interweave which connects Queer individuals groups, and communities and raised money for the OC AIDS Walk and World AIDS Day. (There is also the AIDS Team Ministry which prepares and delivers frozen meals once every 1-2 weeks (160-240 meals per month) to people with HIV/AIDS and other debilitating illnesses.) The OCUUC was founded by Catherine L. Hofmann in 1950 when she couldn’t find a liberal church to attend in Orange County. She thus asked for the help of a Universalist pastor in Pasadena and invited people on the Univeralist mailing list to Sunday morning meetings. They came and it grew from there.

So how does all this fit into Alinsky’s model? First, Alinsky starts with the premise that power is not given but taken. One should consider how things are, not how one would like them to be. From there, the goal is democracy and empowerment. One achieves this by building social capital across similar as well as dissimilar groups. This is illustrated by how various organizations were brought together – e.g. the UUCA, OCUUC, and Walgreens (called bridging) – and how individuals within the groups are brought together, as in how UU churches bring together people from various backgrounds on Sunday mornings (bonding). There is power in numbers and what is formed through coalition-building is an organization of organizations. Leadership forms organically from this process as was seen by the teams having a leader by consensus (the leader of the UUCA team has been with the church for a long time and was most involved with it). This is also the result of the presence of the iron rule, that is, never do for people what they can do themselves. Hence, instead of a central authority dictating what to do, people are self-empowered and gain more control of their lives with the skills they develop, the information they acquire, and the connections they make. Also critical in organizing is appealing to people’s self-interest (one person interviewed said his uncle whom he was close to had AIDS and so it is personal to him), focusing on small, winnable goals (e.g. raising $50 and walking), maintaining frequent contact (such as meeting every Sunday), monitoring (e.g. a list of recipient agencies which provide accounting records of funds used), and an inclusive deliberatory process (as in how members of the church decide the budget). Thus the community becomes a site of power which can be used to address other issues.

In closing, activists and radicals need not despair with these tools and rules in mind. She or he simply needs to get involved in community organizations and educate others on how to become empowered.

REFERENCES

AIDS Walk Orange County. “About HIV/AIDS.”

http://www.aidswalkorangecounty.com/about-aids-walk/about

hiv-aids/

_____. “AIDS Services Foundation Orange County.”

http://www.aidswalkorangecounty.com/about-aids-

walk/presenting-agency/

Green, Kathleen. “Our 53^rd Year in Orange County.”

http://uuchurchoc.org/

Orange Coast Unitarian Universalist Church. “A Welcoming

Congregation in Orange County, CA.” http://ocuuc.org/

According to the current capitalist system, only that which passes through the market and directly adds to the GDP counts as work, whether it is negative or positive, legal or illegal. It should be noted that high GDP does not translate to a high standard of living for the population since the cost of living may be equally high and, in fact, the poverty rate has increased even as global GDP has increased. Ergo, disasters, accidents, sexual exploitation, drugs, and war are all considered beneficial through the lens of the capitalist system. This is because it allows the market to grow, and the nature of capitalism is that it must constantly grow to avoid inflation, high unemployment, etc. In contrast, “nice” things such as peace, beauty, environmental preservation, subsistence production, and leisure are considered useless and undesirable, that is, unless profit could be made from them. Most importantly, household production such as childcare, food preparation, collecting firewood and water, subsistence farming, reproductive labor, and domestic chores are devalued and unpaid, that is, they are practically invisible to the international United Nations National System of Accounts, even though those non-primary forms of production are essential for the health of society and the economy. People who are in that type of work are considered “unoccupied”, according to Marilyn Waring’s film Who’s Counting? (whereas creating nuclear missiles is a valued occupation). This affects women disproportionately in that 75% of household work is done by women (without pay, benefits, or compensation) and also means that half the world’s population is excluded. It is evident in this that there is also a global and local patriarchal factor involved, one of domination and chauvinism. As Adriana Mata Greenwood articulates, “It is generally accepted that inequality between men and women stems from attitudes, prejudices, assumptions concerning the different roles assigned to men and women in society” (1999:28). In addition, it is those with power who largely determine the perspectives of the populace, and these perspectives, in turn, serve the interests of the dominant groups and allow them to stay in power. This is one of the keys to globalization and colonization.

Concerning the experiences of women, less than one percent of property is owned by women, one in five women are physically and/or sexually abused (which is normalized and even higher in areas of conflict), women earn two-thirds of men’s salaries despite doing two-thirds of its work, and only seventeen percent of national leaders and government representatives are women. Colonized women such as Acephie in Farmer’s article are often forced into the market and are at high risk for HIV/AIDs as many are cornered into doing sexual favors (2003).

Regarding women and colonialism, in pre-colonial Africa, women possessed mother-rights, held many privileges as inheritance was often matrilineal, had political and religious power. With the advent of colonialism, those privileges and rights were eliminated and the division of labor between the sexes was disrupted. As the men were forced to find employment in the cities, the women were left with the burden of carrying out every task necessary for the survival of themselves and their families. Also, as the money sector was male-dominated and considered modern, the women’s work of providing the basic necessities of life were considered “backwards” and ultimately devalued (Rodney 1982:118).

Moreover, women were sometimes portrayed as pure and nurturing, other times as villainous, some as good mothers, others as bad mothers, they were depicted as needing protection from their savage men and thus an excuse for colonization, and their sexuality, gender, and bodies were controlled in terms of who they could have relations with in order to both regulate bloodlines and maintain a hierarchical social order, whilst the white men were free to cross the boundaries and sexually colonize the women, whose children were left with the women, allowing the men to have full control over wealth and  inheritance while the women were chained down (Pettman 1996:148).

This is how and why women are invisible despite their roles being crucial to globalization and colonization, which continues to the present. The patriarchal ideas are ingrained in the collective consciousness and subconsciousness of ordinary people to such a degree that it is all too often overlooked and viewed as “natural”, when in reality it is simply oppression. It is imperative, therefore, to expand the concept of work and to redefine value in order to restore the basic dignities of women and all people.

References

Greenwood, Mata. 1999. “Gender Issues in Labor Statistics.” Pp. 28 in Beyond Borders, edited by Paula S. Rothenberg. New York: Worth Publishers.

Pettman, Jan Jindy. 1996. “Women, Colonisation, and Racism.” Pp. 148, 437 in Beyond Borders, edited by Paula S. Rothenberg. New York: Worth Publishers.

Rodney, Walter. 1982. “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa.” Pp. 111, 118 in Beyond Borders, edited by Paula S. Rothenberg. New York: Worth Publishers.

Waring, Marilyn. 1995. Who’s Counting? [Video]. National Film Board of Canada.

According to the Wisconsin Alliance for Women’s Health, there are 52 family planning clinics in Wisconsin that serve more than 33,000 residents. Currently, these clinics operate in state family planning networks; they rely on General Purpose Revenue (GPR) funding, which enables clinics to qualify for the Maternal Child Health (MCH) block grant program through matching funds. Family planning clinics receiving MCH funds must meet the guidelines established by the federal Department of Health and Human Services through Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements and must provide at least 75% of their revenue in matching funds.

The state GPR funds and federal grants are used to sustain many family planning programs and the critical services they provide. GPR funds, which primarily come from individual income taxes and sales taxes, are used to ensure that low-income women are eligible for routine preventive health care, supplies, and education for successful family planning and health outcomes. As a result of the elimination of $1.9 million (per year) in GPR funds, approved by the legislature after being proposed by Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker as part of his 2011–2013 biennial budget plan (AB 40, SB 27), family planning will struggle to meet the MOE requirements for the combined MCH funding. This puts additional health services at risk (i.e., congenital care), as meeting MOE requirements allows for the continuation of federal funding and increases the clinics’ capacity to provide services that allow affordable women’s reproductive health care and perinatal and postnatal care.

Of particular concern is that Walker and his secretary of health services, Dennis Smith, have modified the MOE requirements so that they do not have relevance to the needs of maternal or child health, thus making Wisconsin ineligible for grant funding.

Although GPR and grants are not the only source of funding for clinics, such as FPHS, current estimates are that for every $1.00 invested in a public family planning clinic, the states saves $4.00 that otherwise would be used for births reliant on medical assistance (MA). RxSocialChange is urging you to take action!

References:

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/2011-13%20Budget/Budget%20Papers/366.pdf

http://www.jsonline.com/business/121219724.html

http://www.wiawh.org/media/documents/pdf/2011_WAWH_Budget_Analysis%205.11.11.pdf

http://www.fphs.org/pdfs/News_release_050211.pdf

http://www.fphs.org/pdfs/HHSLetter.pdf

Emergency Contraception and Faith in Truth

 Women’s health, in regard to either pregnancy prevention or pregnancy maintenance, requires resources and referrals that will best educate women on how to actively promote and enhance their own health. Although striving towards such a goal seems expected, it has nevertheless been difficult for policy-makers and healthcare providers to grasp the differences between all-inclusive options for women, versus ideologically-driven mentalities. This is in large part due to the fact that women’s health is a field that is entrenched with personal bias against certain types of sexual behavior. At any rate, the use of contraceptives is still highly maintained in most modern areas of medicine, which is fortunate, as even the most careful use of birth control has some degree of risk of unplanned pregnancy. Such unintended pregnancies incur costly medical expenditures and additional hardship for the populations that government agencies serve. Furthermore, careful analysis of the preventative benefits of Emergency Contraceptive Pills (ECPs), as well as the agencies that supply this service, quickly reveals that the welfare of our community, and even our nation, would face serious economic and social turmoil if women did not have access to this service.

In the interest of explaining what Women’s Health education entails and why strong opposition to it often jeopardizes its fate, it is important to consider the debate surrounding emergency contraception. The medical purpose of emergency contraception will be elaborated on and I will analyze the importance of being aware of ECP availability, including timely and affordable access to ensure their efficacy.

Major ethical impasses have long contributed to the decline in positive progress toward achieving the goal of increasing access of emergency contraception, and recent political attention has been focused on Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPC). Data on emergency contraception gathered through research by CPCs and Family Planning Clinics, and regarded by young women and the public as important resources for pregnancy counsel, are used for comparison purposes. It should be noted that a key element regarding this point is that if CPCs are an alternative resource to pregnancy consult, the decision to use this service, like Sloane (2007) charges should include “…the same informed choice one uses for the usual forms of medical care” (p. 570). Whether or not this issue speaks to policymakers, it does speak to the health and dignity of women who wish to avoid pregnancy. Just as important, it speaks to general humanity and people’s right to the truth in making informed decisions about their health. To remain fair and balanced, it is imperative this perspective harnesses current and relevant medical and legislative insights.

Emergency Contraception Pills

 Emergency contraception pills (ECPs) are commonly utilized in family planning programs as a preventative measure for unwanted pregnancies. They are used when sex has been forced, a barrier method has failed, or when the sexual partners have failed to use contraception altogether. As with most contraception, problems arise when the safety and efficacy of the contraceptive mechanism are not entirely certain. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proved the efficacy and safety of Plan B, used interchangeably with the ‘morning-after pill.’ Plan B contains Levonorgestrel, a progesterone hormone that works to prevent or delay ovulation. In general, once a woman begins treatment with oral Levonorgestrel, the viscosity of her cervical mucus increases, thereby reducing any opportunity for fertilization and implantation. The significance of this mechanism, however, can only be understood if the actions after coitus are illustrated.

 Conception

As often as women and men are warned that it only takes a single unprotected sexual encounter to cause pregnancy, many find it surprising to learn that conception is an elaborate biological process fraught with physiological barriers. However, when those barriers are surpassed and fertilization occurs there are a limited number of alternatives available for those women who do not wish to proceed with a pregnancy. Levonorgestrel was created for just those women.

Sloane (2002) reports that “…between 250 and 400 million sperm …are deposited in the vaginal cavity” upon ejaculation; if this happens close to the ovulatory stage, these sperm encounter -“a very hostile environment” within the vaginal canal (p. 314). During this period, roughly the mid-point of the regular menstruation cycle, vaginal acidity is hazardous to sperm survival. At the same time, leucocytes become prevalent in the vaginal canal and target the ‘foreign invader’ sperm for destruction and elimination. Sperm, therefore, deplete their available energy stores in their race to rapidly transverse the vagina and enter the uterine cavity. Once safely within the more hospitable environment of the uterine cavity sperm have been observed to enter a state of rest, until they are signaled to respond to a released ovum. To date, the precise chemical communication that takes place between the sperm and egg, which facilitates the reactivation of sperm motility, remains unknown. However, the molecular events that occur in response to those communications are well-defined. Sloane has termed this subsequent process as capacitation. Those sperms that succeed in reaching the available ovum, however, are faced with a whole new set of physiological barriers. In order for the sperm to gain access to the egg it must penetrate the egg’s outer covering (the zona pellucida) and an inner layer of cells (the corona radiata). To accomplish this, the sperm secretes digestive enzymes that effectively create a tunnel to the egg’s cytoplasmic core wherein fertilization takes place.

This entire acrosomal reaction is reliant upon a few brief events that occur in the woman before ovulation. At the start of the menstrual cycle, estrogen levels are low. In order to maintain homeostasis, the body compensates for the hormonal imbalance by secreting the follicle-stimulating hormone, which is in turn responsible for the initiation of egg maturation. Of the many developing follicles, only one will be released from the ovary in preparation for fertilization (American Pregnancy Association, 2011). At this point estrogen levels are significantly increased, since this hormone is required for the signaling events that trigger complete maturation. In response, the hypothalamus and pituitary gland will then release LH, the luteinizing hormone. Interestingly, LH is one of the principal targets of the active ingredients found in emergency contraception pills (ECPs) used to prevent pregnancy.

Levonorgestrel

Although a few different ECPs are currently on the market, this paper will focus on the variation known as Plan B One-Step™ by Teva Women’s Health, Inc. This single dose pill is clinically defined as an off-white round tablet containing 1.5mg of levonorgestrel, the only active ingredient. The pill also contains the following inactive ingredients: colliodial silicone dioxide, corn starch, lactose monohydrate, magnesium stearate, potato starch, and talc (Plan B One-Step, 2009). Before we delve into the exact mechanism of levonorgestrel, we will discuss its intended use and clinical effectiveness.

Pharmacists note that Plan B One-Step should be taken within 72 hours after unprotected sexual intercourse to achieve the greatest efficacy. The medication is available over-the-counter without a prescription for women 17 and older throughout the United States. It is often difficult to determine what type of side effects will appear for each individual. The clinical trials were designed to examine several variables and the most common adverse side effects were reported as: “…heavier menstrual bleeding (30.9%), nausea (13.7%), lower abdominal pain (13.3%), fatigue (13.3%) and headache (10.3%)” (Plan B One-Step, 2009).  The general consensus among health care professionals and consumers has been that Plan B’s side effects are relatively mild.

Once ingested, levonorgestrel interferes with a woman’s natural secretion of the LH hormone. If Plan B One-Step is taken prior to the LH surge, as mentioned earlier, follicular rupture is impeded (Downing & Sturpe, 2010). Specifically, levonorgestrel-mediated inhibition of the LH surge renders any viable sperm incapable of capacitation; thus, fertilization of the ovum is not achieved. The mechanisms, of course, vary considerably depending on how soon the woman begins treatment after the unprotected sexual encounter and at what stage she was at in her menstruation cycle when coitus occurred (Downing & Sturpe, 2010).

Of all the scientific studies that have been completed on emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs), the issue that has generated the most controversy is whether or not ECPs interrupt or damage physiological activity that takes place after fertilization. For this reason, the public became increasingly convinced that emergency contraception was a medical abortifaceint. This concern has caused not only ethical constraints, but also constraints that extend to the design of experiments and studies in human subjects, which focus on the consequences of ECP ingestion after fertilization has occurred. There is currently no direct evidence approving or disproving the theory that ECPs interrupt activity after fertilization. Thus additional insights must be provided from animal studies.

When animal studies were performed, predictably, levonorgestrel, the active ingredient in ECPs, had no effect on animal subjects at each measured interval, especially after implantation. Thus, the two researchers who conducted the study concluded that pregnancy could be sustained even after levonorgestrel ingestion.

Other researchers like Murphy (2011) emphasize the same point, which is that, “recent studies have not supported an effect of altered endometrial receptivity that interferes with implantation” (p. 907). In 2009, researchers conducting an in-vitro study tested endometrial expression under the influence of the drugs levonorgestrel and mifepristone. With the aid of a three-dimensional endometrial construct, they concluded that several epithethlial and stromal receptors, measured through timed endometrial biopsies, were not affected by the administration of levonorgestrel treatment. This was not the same for mifepristone although opponents of EC lead many to believe so.

Murphy also debunked recent claims of an increased risk of ectopic pregnancy, claiming, “…due to effects on thickening reproductive tract mucous and slowing down tubal motility…there are no data to date that support this concern” (p. 908). The researchers even cited research claiming that ECPs have protective benefits against ectopic pregnancies. Further clinical assessments showed no contradictions other than pregnancy. The overall effectiveness of ECPs has been reported to be high, albeit contingent on the amount of time that has passed between coitus and ingestion.  In the absence of contraception therapy, the risk of pregnancy for a one-time sexual intercourse experience is currently 8%, but with ECPs, this risk decreases to 2%.

Finally, The American Medical Association, widely recognized as one of the largest organizations of physicians dedicated to the “betterment of public health,” approves the use of Emergency Contraception. As outlined in AMA policy H-75.985, “Access to Emergency Contraception”, physicians should actively commit to educating patients about emergency contraception as part of the standard contraceptive counseling for individuals of reproductive age.

Context of Care

 The biological review of Plan B-One Step, even with the help of objective, scientific facts, should consider the controversial aspects regarding the administration of the pill. In the context of its use, it must be emphasized that its mechanism plays a complex role in terms of how pregnancy is identified and defined. Consequently, the scientific interpretation of pregnancy is interwoven with how the public understands prevention and healthcare. Herein lies the motivation for the striking divide between social movements.

Emergency contraception, supported by evidenced-based study, does not interrupt an established pregnancy. With this in mind, the claim that ECPs are abortifacients is not based on fact. According to the Office of Population Research at Princeton University, as well as the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, citing the National Institutes of Health and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, “pregnancy begins when the fertilized egg implants in the lining of a woman’s uterus” (2011).

Sloane (2002) concurs by stating, “There is no evidence that oral contraceptives have any effect on an already-implanted ovum” (p. 470). Even with the wealth of evidence supporting this claim, the myth that ECPs are abortion pills continues to be ubiquitously and passionately maintained in public to this day. No greater example of this statement can be confirmed without looking at how CPCs are operated. CPCs currently operate with practices that seem to undermine the past 35 years of progress made in women’s health.

 CPCs and Emergency Contraception

Over the past five years, many women, healthcare professionals, activists, and even lay persons, have brought attention to the fact that agencies that call themselves crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) have not only been coercive and deceptive, but have also made women victims of harassment. Additionally, some women claim that CPCs have even threatened their right to informed consent and put their health at risk (Harrison and Kristin, 2006). During this five-year period, there have been an estimated 4,000 CPCs in the United States, some of which have been prominent across Canada (Harrison).

Recent criticism has been leveled at CPCs for falsely imitating the appearance of a medical clinic, for dressing staff to look like physicians and nurses, and even for using medical grade ultrasound equipment without requiring skilled ultrasound technicians for its operation (Harrison). Some of these clinics are even going to great extremes by recruiting medical professionals who object to family planning and abortion care. On the other hand, others argue that many of the medical professionals who staff CPCs or even just consult clients may feel compelled by their faith or conscience to help. By intentionally locating CPCs near actual family planning clinics, CPC staff has easy access to the clinic’s vulnerable, typically young, low-income women. Many CPCs have been shown to wage misleading advertising campaigns while refusing to divulge legal and safe all-options healthcare information to the women they manage to get inside their doors (National Abortion Federation, 2006).

Although there is much more to be said about the actions of CPCs, arguably what should be the primary concern is the ill-informed and limited counseling these agencies offer clients, specifically about Emergency Contraception.

Whether a woman is pregnant or not, the type of potential harm inflicted on those using CPCs is all the same. If a woman discovers she is pregnant, some CPCs have been said to withhold medical care, as limited as it, until adoption papers have been signed (National Abortion Federation, 2006). Even before pregnancy results are revealed, clients subject to in-person care versus phone counseling adamantly emphasize that ECPs are abortifacients and that condoms are an unreliable means of preventing STDs and pregnancy. While CPCs do not seem to require their staff to provide information approved by the American Medical Association, a more devastating revelation is in an analysis of the health cost incurred by women when they haven’t been counseled about emergency contraception.

Efficacy of Plan B-One Step

In November 2010, researchers set out to determine the effectiveness of oral Levonorgestrel and the risk of pregnancy after various 24-hour time intervals. Prior to this study, the effectiveness of oral Levonorgestrel for 72 hours of unprotected sexual intercourse was not fully understood. The World Health Organization, using random clinical trials, gave each woman Plan B-One Step 48, 72, and 120 hours after unprotected intercourse. Using logistical regression, the results proved that up until the fifth day, the efficacy was the same. On the fifth day, however, the risk of pregnancy is said to increase over five times than it normally would following earlier treatment. This study is significant in that protection, although minor, surpasses the original FDA recommendation stating that ECPs like Plan B offer protection only if taken within 72 hours after coitus.

 Against CPCs

As much as CPCs should be criticized according to individual value, more often than not they have a reputation for delaying pregnancy results or sharing the results with great ambiguity (Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc., 1998). At times, too, pregnancy tests may be unnecessary. Robert Pearson, an anti-choice activist, was the first person ever to create a CPC and published a manual that is still widely used today. The manual, “How to Start and Operate a Pro-life Outreach Pregnancy Service Center” as cited by the Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc. (1998), explicitly states, “If the client asks how long it takes to do the test, tell her we offer the results in 30 minutes, you will have the results by that time. (You have not told her how long it takes you to run the test, but how long it will be before she has the results of the test.)”

Pearson’s suggestion, which clearly shows an intention to delay pregnancy results, perfectly illustrates how politicized pregnancy has become. Many people would agree that a positive pregnancy test can only happen after implantation has occurred, something of course that would make emergency contraception irrelevant. However, CPC staff may put the patient at unnecessary risk by failing to disclose that a pregnancy test is not accurate within 48 hours of sexual intercourse and by delaying that information or even by administering an unnecessary pregnancy test, the patient is put at additional risk by not seeking timely medical care.

The legislative disputes about making ECPs an over-the-counter medication, along with a blatant refusal to provide ECPs, through the protection of the “Conscience Clause” shows just how polarized ECPs have become, even in the short time since the FDA approved their marketing. It would seem reasonable to assume, of course, that pregnancy counseling would be an objective and unbiased practice. Considering all the scientific literature on how pregnancy occurs, the willingness by some parties to accept information not based on fact is bothersome. One might argue that some people are especially susceptible to misinformation shared by CPCs. As one Crisis Pregnancy Center operator noted, “About 65 percent of the center’s clients are women aged 19 to 25, the “most abortion vulnerable group of women in the United States” (Weeks, 2001). She goes on to state, “Girls ages 15 to 18 make up about 35 percent of the clientele.”

To complicate circumstances even more, many CPCs fail to disclose available treatments that require immediate application for success, such as ECPs. Pearson’s manual also asks CPC staff to, “Never counsel for contraception or refer to agencies making contraceptives available. “Fornication is still a sin no matter what the circumstances” (Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc., 1998). While waiting for the unnecessary pregnancy results, it is clear a client endures anything but a full-range of reproductive health options.

All of this would seem appropriate to many, because as consumers it is their choice. However, if 65 percent of the women seeking services are the most vulnerable, this raises some moral questions. After all, a mistimed and unwanted pregnancy can be inherently traumatic and stressful for a woman.

At a time in history where Western medicine has advanced its reproductive technology and services, the idea that ECPs are ignored as a treatment option is inexcusable. Furthermore, as time elapses, especially when the efficacy of Plan B-One Step is greatest within a time frame of up to 120 hours after unprotected intercourse, the additional constraints imposed by CPCs puts women at an increased risk of unwanted pregnancy, which may lead to greater exasperation and stress.

In Defense of CPCs

As a person of faith, detaching oneself from religious teaching and challenge faith-based leaders may not be comfortable. Roman Catholic religious doctrine requires that faithful Catholics “…hold a consistent life ethic means to work to protect the dignity of life from conception through birth, through childhood, through the many challenges of adult life, and through infirmity and death” (Brice, 2006). This teaching is humane and well-respected by many. However, the sanctity of life should also be shown with mindfulness to scientific evidence.

Spiritual answers and scientific truth seen to include difficult hurdles that require meticulous investigation, which are often made more complex in the context of self-determination and authority. Do we place faith in modern medicine and its answers confirmed through years of clinical trials and robust studies? Or, does scientific law fail at the hands of the God’s people? Insofar as it requires discourse, scientific fact is also a type of faith guided by subjective belief and grounded by objective evaluation. As scientists quantify when pregnancy occurs, and how pharmacological intervention manipulates the physiological behavior of an embryo, one asks, “What are we to do?”

What are we to do with this information? Have we reached an impasse in which public policy cannot speak for the common good? To begin to answer these, one must know where good originates and what standards fulfill the needs for achieving the goals of the common good. Can what is good be measured by scientific data alone? Such questions reflect the challenges of implementing public policy in a pluralistic and partisan society.

The Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap, the Archbishop of Denver made a profound statement in response to Catholic healthcare. He states to Catholic professionals, that if they, “… cannot apply it [on reproductive principles of faith-based teaching] with an honest will – then you need to follow your conscience. The Church respects that.” He further states, citing Newman, “Obedience to conscience is the road to integrity. But conscience… has rights because it has duties… One of those duties is honesty.”

It is no accident that theologians and secularists approach the same situation with their hearts flowing in different directions. Whereas a family clinic focuses on pregnancy prevention and planning, CPCs steer towards abstinence and nurturing pregnancies, sometimes using subtle force, to ensure that a client goes to term. Despite the different intentions, it should be noted that any behavior that infringes on a person’s right to a moral conscience should be reevaluated.

Unwanted Pregnancy

Several consequences, including a greater risk of unwanted pregnancy, have been identified when a woman is forced to bring her pregnancy to full term, either through unconscious awareness of misinformation about ECPs perpetuated by CPCs, or a total lack of general knowledge about the availability of ECPs. In his research study, Bouchard (2005) found that among 118 adult couples, those facing an unwanted pregnancy faced higher risks of inadequate care, perinatal morbidity, and significant postnatal problems than those who had intended to become pregnant.

The incidence of depression created some uncertainty. Bouchard reports that unplanned pregnancies, predictably, reveal high levels of neuroticism, depression, and perceived stress (p. 629). However, whether the incidence of depression is ascribed to the discovery of an unplanned pregnancy or because depressed women generally have more unplanned pregnancies, is debatable. It is not known whether the couples received counseling from CPCs to help through the process, or if they were receiving care from a family planning clinic.

Should this data come as a surprise, further research on having an accurate understanding of sexual knowledge portrays a more optimistic approach to reproductive decision making, and consequently the health of women. Providing women with full reproductive options in a timely manner, especially information about safe and effective contraceptives, and allowing them to achieve an informed consent status can help them lead happier and healthier lives. This would not be possible with severe depression and stress. Critics, however, are quick to argue that the same may hold true depending on the outcome of CPC counseling.

Conclusion

It is increasingly becoming the consensus among policy-makers, healthcare professionals, and even consumers, that healthcare is a multi-faceted issue that goes beyond just treating the symptoms, but also looks at various dimensions of behavior. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that mandatory ECP counseling is quickly becoming the norm. To some reproductive health advocates, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCs) may pose a threat in respect to providing full reproductive options for women; an achievement that many years of societal diligence has worked to create. In addition, although the services of CPCs are becoming more front and center, there is still little known about how beneficial they truly are to their clients. Given the fact that the target population of CPCs is often vulnerable young women who are at a particularly sensitive age, there is a crucial need for further investigation into these clinics and their supposed intentions to further promote the success of Plan B.

References

American Pregnancy Association. (2011, March). Understanding Ovulation. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from American Pregnancy Association: http://www.americanpregnancy.org/gettingpregnant/understandingovulation.html

Bouchard, G. (2005). Adult Couples Facing a Planned or an Unplanned Pregnancy: Two Realities. Journal of Family Issues , 619-637.

Brice, S. (2006). Third Sunday in Ordinary Time. Retrieved April 29, 2011, from St. Anne’s Wausau- Bulletin Letters: http://www.stanneswausau.org/Bulletin_Letters_2006/l012206.html

Carlson, S. (2007, May). The Politics of Emergency Contraception: How Broad Refusal Clauses Are Unwise and Against Medical Advice. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from Harvard Law- LEDA: http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/817/Carlson_07.html

Chaput, M. R. (2010). Health-care reform and the future of the Catholic health-care vocation. Houston: Archbishop of Denver.

Curricular Organizer for Reproductive Health Education. (2011). Emergency Contraception. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from CORE: http://core.arhp.org/search/searchResults.aspx?c=3

Downing, D., & Sturpe, D. A. (2010). Emergency Contraception. In L. M. Borgelt, M. B. O’connell, J. A. Smith, & K. A. Calis, Women’s Health Across the Lifespan: A Pharmacotherapeutic Approach (pp. 311-323). Bethesda: American Society of Health System Pharmacists.

Harrison, Kristin. (2006). Abortion Facts: Crisis Pregnancy Centers. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from National Abortion Federation: http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/cpc.html

Hatcher, R., Trussel, J., & Nelson, A. L. (2008). Emergency Contraception. In R. Hatcher, J. Trussel, & A. L. Nelson, Contraceptive Technology (pp. 87-109). n.a.: Ardent Media.

Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc. (1998, October). The deceptive practices of crisis pregnancy centers. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from Institute for First Amendment Studies, Inc.: http://www.publiceye.org/ifas/fw/9810/crisis.html

Murphy, P. A. (2011). Contraception and Reproductive Health. In T. L. King, & M. C. Brucker, Pharmacology for Women’s Health (pp. 907-908). Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation. (2011, January 1). The Difference Between Emergency Contraception and Medical Abortion. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from Naral Pro-Choice America: http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:3OeJfeDv9LgJ:www.naral.org/media/fact-sheets/birth-control-ec-mifepristone.pdf+american+medical+association+emergency+contraception&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESj7ARNQF78qFqsc9ZLkUdaeiXuuNn_WagMha4ZRxq5KSbSUqXMe

National Abortion Federation. (2006). Crisis Pregnancy Centers: An Affront to Choice. Washington D.C.: National Abortion Federation.

National Conference of State Legislators. (2010, August). Issues and Research: Emergency Contraception. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from NCSL: http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14420

Piaggio, G., Kapp, N., & von Hertzen, H. (2011). Effect on pregnancy rates of the delay in the administration of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a combined analysis of four WHO trials. Retrieved April 25, 2011, from Science Direct: Contraception: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T5P-51WM25T-2&_user=10380671&_coverDate=01%2F07%2F2011&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=&_origin=&_zone=rslt_list_item&_cdi=5008&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=2&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_

Plan B One-Step. (2009, August). Higlights of Prescribing Information. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from Plan B One-Step: http://www.planbonestep.com/pdf/PlanBOneStepFullProductInformation.pdf

Sloane, E. (2002). Biology of Women. Albany: Thomson Learning.

Teva Women’s Health, Inc. (2010). Consumers: Plan B One-Step. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from Plan B One-Step: http://www.planbonestep.com/

The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2005, November). Fact Sheet- Emergency Contraception. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from Women’s Health Policy Facts: http://www.kff.org/womenshealth/upload/3344-03.pdf

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2010, August 26). Drugs: Plan B. Retrieved April 2, 2011, from U.S. Food and Drug Administration: http://www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/postmarketdrugsafetyinformationforpatientsandproviders/ucm109775.htm

On the Infanticide of Marie Farrar

Marie Farrar, born in April,
No marks, a minor, rachitic, both parents dead,
Allegedly, up to now without police record,
Committed infanticide, it is said,
As follows: in her second month, she says,
With the aid of a barmaid she did her best
To get rid of her child with two douches,
Allegedly painful but without success.
But you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

She then paid out, she says, what was agreed
And continued to lace herself up tight.
She also drank liquor with pepper mixed in it
Which purged her but did not cure her plight.
Her body distressed her as she washed the dishes,
It was swollen now quite visibly.
She herself says, for she was still a child,
She prayed to Mary most earnestly.
But you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

Her prayers, it seemed, helped her not at all.
She longed for help. Her trouble made her falter
And faint at early mass. Often drops of sweat
Broke out in anguish as she knelt at the altar.
Yet until her time had come upon her
She still kept secret her condition.
For no one believed such a thing had happened,
That she, so unenticing, had yielded to temptation.
But you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

And on that day, she says, when it was dawn,
As she washed the stairs it seemed a nail
Was driven into her belly. She was wrung with pain.
But still she secretly endured her travail.
All day long while hanging out the laundry
She racked her brains till she got it through her head
She had to bear the child and her heart was heavy.
It was very late when she went up to bed.
But you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

She was sent for again as soon as she lay down:
Snow had fallen and she had to go downstairs.
It went on till eleven. It was a long day.
Only at night did she have time to bear.
And so, she says, she gave birth to a son.
The son she bore was just like all the others.
She was unlike the others but for this.
There is no reason to despise this mother.
You, too, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

Accordingly I will go on with the story
Of what happened to the son that came to be.
(She says she will hide nothing that befell)
So let it be a judgment upon both you and me.
She says she had scarcely gone to bed when she
Was overcome with sickness and she was alone,
Not knowing what would happen, yet she still
Contrived to stifle all her moans.
And you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

With her last strength, she says because
Her room had now grown icy cold, she then
Dragged herself to the latrine and there
Gave birth as best she could (not knowing when)
But toward morning. She says she was already
Quite distracted and could barely hold
The child for snow came into the latrine
And her fingers were half numb with cold.
You, too, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

Between the latrine and her room, she says,
Not earlier, the child began to cry until
It drove her mad so that she says
She did not cease to beat it with her fists
Blindly for some time till it was still.
And then she took the body to her bed
And kept it with her there all through the night:
When morning came she hid it in the shed.
But you, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

Marie Farrar, born in April,
And unmarried mother, convicted, died in
The Meissen penitentiary,
She brings home to you all men’s sin.
You who bear pleasantly between clean sheets
And give the name “blessed” to your womb’s weight
Must not damn the weakness of the outcast,
For her sin was black but her pain was great.
Therefore, I beg you, check your wrath and scorn
For man needs help from every creature born.

My friend says this poem makes her cry. What is evident about most women who decide to have abortions is that they do not take it lightly. It is not a spontaneous decision nor is it a careless decision. It is an important decision deeply contemplated and strongly felt. Therefore, I find it quite shameful when anti-choice advocates attack those that seek abortions both verbally and legislatively, portraying them as promiscuous, impulsive, thoughtless, and cold-blooded. This couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, many regularly use safe sex measures but they are not fail-proof. They may be socially and economically unable to care for a child or are not healthy enough to carry a baby to term (and this includes married women so the ideology of abstinence before marriage as the ultimate solution does not fly). More tragic are cases of rape and incest. Yet even many victims of rape feel attachment to the fetus in their wombs and are not exactly jumping for joy when they go through the abortion. Considering that women even willing to risk their lives to abort speaks to the weight of the their situations.

Is there an easier way? Fortunately, there is something called emergency contraception (EC), commonly referred to as the morning-after pill. In short, EC can prevent pregnancy for up to five days after unprotected sex, is available at health centers and drugstores, and can cost from $10 to $70. EC is not the same as abortion or the abortion pill. It is a form of birth control. Accordingly, “Emergency contraception is made of one of the hormones found in birth control pills — progestin. Hormones are chemicals made in our bodies. They control how different parts of the body work. The hormone in the morning-after pill works by keeping a woman’s ovaries from releasing eggs — ovulation. Pregnancy cannot happen if there is no egg to join with sperm. The hormone in the morning-after pill also prevents pregnancy by thickening a woman’s cervical mucus. The mucus blocks sperm and keeps it from joining with an egg. The hormone also thins the lining of the uterus. In theory, this could prevent pregnancy by keeping a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.” More information about EC can be found here: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/emergency-contraception-morning-after-pill-4363.asp

With something as simple as EC, abortions (especially unsafe ones) can be avoided, unwanted kids would not have to suffer abuse and neglect, and the lives of the mothers can be saved. Thus, knowledge of and access to EC must be made more available.

Personally, I would feel a sense of love and responsibility towards my child and partner, the one who carried our child. However, speaking as a male, I also understand how easy it is for a guy to run out on his family as though there are no strings attached. Having a baby, especially unexpectedly, can be quite unnerving for adults, let alone those who are still children themselves. The experience can be twice as frightening for females as they are the ones who are pregnant and usually the ones stuck with the baby after it’s born and must raise it to adulthood. Ergo, I would highly endorse the use of EC if my partner was not ready to have a child and there were problems with the usual safe sex methods, for our sake as well as our would-be child’s sake.

I hope others feel the same way as it could prevent the ruining of many lives. Let’s have less Marie Farrar stories and more stories about reproductive freedom and saved lives. Happy EC Awareness Day!