MEDIA KITS
An Overview of Abortion in the United States
NEWS RELEASES
Despite Better Education and Later Marriage, Young People in Central America Face Considerable Sexual Health Risks
(06/02/2008)
Consensus Grows that Patients’ Needs Ultimately Outweigh Providers’ Right to Refuse Services
(05/28/2008)
Perception That Teens Frequently Substitute Oral Sex for Intercourse a Myth
(05/20/2008)
EVIDENCE CHECK
Review of Key Findings of "Emerging Answers 2007" (November 2007)
Review of an authoritative report on the effectiveness of sex education programs concluding that there is not sufficient evidence to justify the widespread dissemination of abstinence-only-until-marriage programs.
Advisory on Zogby Poll Commissioned by NAEA (July 2007)
Review of a biased survey conducted by Zogby International on behalf of the National Abstinence Education Association (NAEA) in May 2007 that purports to show broad public support for abstinence-only education.
Advisory on ACF Review of Comprehensive Sex Ed Curricula (July 2007)
Review of a poorly conducted analysis on the content and effectiveness of nine comprehensive sex education curricula released by the federal Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in June 2007.
NEWS IN CONTEXT
Bush Administration Withholds UNFPA Funding for Seventh Year
One Million People Began HIV Treatment in 2007
State Reproductive Health Policy in 2008
Bush Administration Withholds UNFPA Funding for Seventh Year
On June 26, the Bush administration—for the last time before it is replaced by a new administration in January 2009—made a formal "determination" that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is ineligible, under a longstanding federal anticoercion law, for the $39.7 million that Congress had set aside for it. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte sent a letter to Congress asserting that UNFPA supports China's coercive abortion policies.
The action was predictable. President Bush first blocked a U.S. contribution to UNFPA in 2002 under the 1985 Kemp-Kasten Amendment, which prohibits U.S. foreign aid for any organization that the President determines “supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”
Both the Reagan and Bush I administrations interpreted the law to mean that UNFPA was ineligible for funding simply because it was working in China, despite findings clearing UNFPA of involvement in any coercive practices. The Clinton administration reversed its predecessors’ determination in 1993, thereby making funding available to UNFPA. The Bush administration did likewise in 2001, its first year in office, before reversing itself in 2002 to block funding.
The latest action brings to about $235 million the total amount the Bush administration has withheld from UNFPA since 2002. It will be up to the next administration, which takes office in January 2009, to determine whether the United States will resume making an annual contribution to UNFPA.
UNFPA operates in more than 150 poor countries, but does not provide or pay for abortion services in any of them. Instead, UNFPA works to reduce the need for abortion by promoting voluntary family planning.
Click on the links below for more information on:
The unmet need for contraception in developing countries
The benefits of investing in sexual and reproductive health
Meeting the need for contraception worldwide
One Million People Began HIV Treatment in 2007
About one million HIV-positive people in developing countries started to receive life-saving antiretroviral (ARV) drugs in 2007, according to a new report by UNAIDS, UNICEF and the World Health Organization. That brings to about three million the total number of people in developing countries who now have access to the drugs. But the tremendous progress that has been made in saving lives also brings with it significant challenges.
For many people able to access ARV treatment, HIV infection can now be managed as a chronic disease. The evidence shows that HIV infection need not prevent men and women from safely having sex, bearing children, using most modern contraceptives or accessing abortion services where legally available. Given the rapid growth in the number of people receiving HIV treatment, meeting their sexual and reproductive needs should be an increasingly urgent priority. Doing so not only enables HIV-positive people to live healthy and fulfilling lives, but also is a core component of overall HIV prevention efforts that present the only long-term chance of defeating the disease.
A common challenge in addressing the sexual and reproductive health needs of HIV-positive people is the separation of programs that provide HIV services from those providing sexual and reproductive health services. Prevention of unintended pregnancy in particular is a critical, but largely overlooked, component of any prevention strategy, since so many HIV-positive women wish to delay or prevent pregnancy. Women of reproductive age account for more than half of the 33 million cases of HIV around the world.
Integrating the provision of voluntary contraceptive services into programs where HIV-positive women are going for HIV-related treatment is essential to making U.S. efforts to combat the AIDS epidemic more effective.
Click here for more information on:
Meeting the Sexual and Reproductive Health Needs of People Living with HIV
The Role of Contraception in Preventing HIV
The Needs of Young People in Preventing Pregnancy and HIV
State Reproductive Health Policy in 2008
With the legislative year in full swing, some interesting trends are emerging, largely in the wake of last year’s Supreme Court decision in Gonzales v. Carhart. In its most direct effect, the Court’s decision to uphold the Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 set a major precedent that state legislators seem to be following. Twenty-three bills banning “partial-birth” abortion have been introduced in 11 states so far this year (see Bans on “Partial- Birth” Abortion).
Most of these measures are characterized by their definition of the procedure, lack of a health exception and strict penalties. The Court upheld the federal ban, in part, because it found the definition of the procedure to be sufficiently precise so as to exclude most common second-trimester procedures. To follow this precedent, the pending state measures generally lift the federal ban’s definition almost verbatim.
In addition to upholding the federal ban on “partial-birth” abortion, the Court’s decision in Gonzales v. Carhart included language essentially inviting states to utilize their abortion counseling requirements to include the provision of information aimed at dissuading women from obtaining an abortion (see State Abortion Counseling Policies and the Fundamental Principles of Informed Consent). So far this year, most of the attention given to issues related to abortion counseling has been focused on measures that would mandate the provision of information or services related to ultrasound prior to an abortion.
Most dramatically, measures in eight states (Florida, Kentucky, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia) would go so far as to require the provider to perform an ultrasound prior to any abortion. Some of these would require that the woman be given the opportunity to review the image, while others would not give her that choice. Bills that have passed one house of the legislature in Kentucky and Oklahoma require the provider to review the image with the woman, while permitting the woman to “avert” her eyes from the image if she chooses. Fifteen states had laws on ultrasound provision as of March 31, 2008 (see Requirements for Ultrasound).
Click here for more information on:
Major state legislative actions so far this year
The status of state laws and policies on key reproductive health and rights issues
RSS