The Australian Christian Lobby is wrong. Australians don"t support a gag rule | Rebecca Huntley

It’s the photo that launched a thousand memes. The freshly inaugurated Donald Trump, surrounded by a posse of white dudes signing a directive reinstating a “global gag rule” banning US-funded groups around the world from discussing abortion.

I saw the news about it on social media, shuddered, donated to Planned Parenthood and then felt just a little bit more grateful that I live in this country, a place where abortion and reproductive rights aren’t the hysterical hot button issues they are in the United States. I’ve only recently learned that while we might not share their toxic politics around reproductive rights, we have in the past taken America’s lead on the implementation of the global gag rule. It was last removed in Australia in 2009 by Kevin Rudd.

If the Australian Christian Lobby had its way, we’d follow America’s lead yet again. They are currently engaged in a pretty intense letter writing campaign calling for the re-instatement of an Australian global gag rule.

What is the ‘global gag rule’, and why does Trump support it?

Groups like Family Planning NSW are calling for funding to aid programs, specifically in Pacific Island countries, to be maintained in the May budget and with good reason. The Pacific has some of the worst reproductive and sexual health outcomes globally, with high rates of maternal and infant deaths, unintended and teenage pregnancies, sexual violence and unacceptably high rates of cervical cancer deaths.

Women giving birth in the Pacific are dying at 34 times the rate of women in Australia. Women in the Pacific are dying at up to 10 times the rate of women in Australia from cervical cancer. In developing regions, eight in 10 women with curable sexually transmitted infections do not receive treatment. Every two minutes, a woman dies in pregnancy or childbirth – the majority of these deaths are preventable. The main purpose of the global gag rule might be to stop aid agencies providing advice about abortion but the direct consequence is also to stop them providing a whole range of other services associated with sexual and reproductive health.

The people pushing for a gag rule in this country like to think they speak for the silent majority of Australians. Yet there is no evidence they do. Figures from last week’s Essential Report show Australians strongly support the nation’s commitment to providing important health services to women in Pacific Island nations.

In fact, 89% of Australians feel it is important women in Pacific Island countries have access to sexual and reproductive health services like contraception, cervical cancer screening and family planning. A strong majority of men (85%) and an even stronger majority of women (91%) support Pacific Island women having access to these services. There is very little variation in support across generations and party affiliation.

How important is it that women in Pacific Island countries have access to sexual and reproductive health services – like contraception, cervical cancer screening and family planning?

On the issue of whether our foreign aid budget should support the provision of these services in those countries, again there is strong support across gender and generation. This isn’t a women’s issue, it’s a community concern.

How important is it that Australia, through its foreign aid budget, supports Pacific Island countries to provide sexual and reproductive health services including contraception, cervical screening and family planning?

Finally, on the question of the global gag rule, 67% of Australians (64% men and 70% women) would be concerned if Australia also introduced this rule and stopped aid to groups that provide family planning and sexual and reproductive health services in Pacific Island countries. While opposition to the rule is highest among Greens voters, 62% of Coalition voters report being concerned about such a move.

How concerned would you be if Australia introduced a global gag rule and stopped aid to groups that provide family planning and sexual and reproductive health services in Pacific Island countries?

So much for the silent minority. Only 6% of those polled in the Essential Report would be unconcerned about a gag rule being reinstated. It’s clear that bringing vaccines, maternal health care, family planning and cervical cancer screening to the Pacific Island region is the intent of men and women across Australia.

Australians might be fascinated with Donald Trump. They might applaud his recent action in Syria and some of us might even sympathise with the idea of a ban on Muslim immigration. But the research shows there is no widespread support for a Trump-style gag rule that puts a rightwing Christian agenda before the health and wellbeing of Pacific Island women.

The Australian Christian Lobby is wrong. Australians don"t support a gag rule | Rebecca Huntley

Library cuts harm young people"s mental health services, warns lobby

Public libraries’ significant role supporting the mental health of young people risks being undermined by swingeing budget cuts forced on local authorities, the head of their professional body warned this week. He added that, if funding is not protected, the work of libraries as frontline information resources for young people in need will be pushed on to the already overstretched police, health and social services.

It is estimated that one in 10 UK children experience mental health problems, as do one in four adults. Nick Poole, head of the Chartered Institute of Librarians and Information Professionals (Cilip) providers, told the Guardian that cuts to local library services would “continue to bite the availability of dedicated resources such as advice on anxiety, stress, exams and bullying”.

He warned: “Under-investing in our libraries simply pushes costs elsewhere and means that a young person growing up today has less help and is more vulnerable to the impact of mental health problems on their life.”

His comments follow prime minister Theresa May’s announcement this week of a raft of measures to “transform” attitudes towards mental health, including an extra £15m for community care, extra training for teachers and improved workplace support.

Wellbeing initiatives run by libraries around the country include the Association of Senior Children’s and Education Librarians’ autism–friendly libraries, the Cilip-backed reading for pleasure and empowerment scheme as well as yoga and mindfulness sessions run as part of Oldham libraries’ mental health and wellbeing support. Birmingham, Devon and Bolton city councils are also among library authorities that run dedicated mental health services.

I would like to think that the powers that be recognised the role of libraries in helping vulnerable people.

Sarah Lungley, Suffolk libraries mental health coordinator

The Shelf Help scheme, which is dedicated to children and young people and was launched in 2016 by the Reading Agency, provides a list of 35 books selected by mental health experts and young readers that range from self-help and information guides to comics, memoirs and novels including The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time by Mark Haddon and The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky. Subjects covered range from body image to depression and self-esteem.

Suffolk library authority said that 68% of the books on the scheme had a 30% or higher loan status than other stock. Last year, 10,000 wellbeing inquiries were handled by the county’s libraries. Although it did not have an official breakdown of who sought help through its branches, Sarah Lungley, mental health and wellbeing coordinator, said anecdotal evidence suggested that the majority of enquiries came from concerned parents of young people experiencing difficulties.

“We are in a really good position to connect people to the help and services that they need,” Lungley said. “I would like to think that the powers that be recognised the role of libraries in helping vulnerable people. A lot of people in the community who struggle with mental health will be left vulnerable and lonely if their local library shuts.”

Poole added: “Children, young people and their parents are simply going to find it harder to find a well-stocked library where they can find information about the issues they face.” Without access to professional librarians trained in mental health resources, he said, those struggling would be more reliant on unmediated internet searches to gain information. “As a parent myself, I would be worried about my children using Google like that.”

Public libraries have been caught in the crossfire of a ferocious funding battle being fought between local councils and central government. Official figures released at the end of 2016 revealed that library budgets had fallen by £25m in a year, as a result of councils raiding their resources to shore up frontline services such as social care.

According to an annual survey of library authorities in the UK undertaken by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (Cipfa), total expenditure for the sector fell from £944m to £919m over the year, a 2.6% fall. Over the same period, 121 libraries closed, taking the total number open down to 3,850.

Before Christmas Poole predicted that over the next five years, a further 340 libraries will face closure if proposed cuts go ahead. Libraries in Warrington, Lancashire, Edinburgh, Denbigh and Swindon are among those facing the most severe losses.

Poole said: “We have to find a way of making our political stakeholders understand that a big part of what libraries do is making sure that people with a whole range of issues feel safe and can access information.

“If we remove that function from communities, all you are doing is pushing those library users on to the police and healthcare professionals. If Theresa May isn’t aware of that, her comments are nothing more than an empty soundbite.”

‘The library was a calm, quiet and safe place for me to be’

Fifteen-year-old Josh is adamant that his local library has saved his life. A year-and-a-half ago, school felt like a prison for him, as he struggled to keep up with his classmates due to a variety of issues including severe anxiety and Irlen syndrome, a problem that affects his ability to read and process information. He was also suspected to be on the autism spectrum.

Two years earlier, anxiety attacks and vulnerable feelings had begun to make him dread each school day. “School became an oppressive place to be,” he says. “I was scared and upset and everything just became too much. Everything made me worried and afraid.”

The troubled teen was not a victim of bullying, but the normal noise and chaos to be found in any classroom were a daily nightmare he had to confront.

Only one place made him comfortable: his local library. “The library was a calm, quiet and safe place for me to be,” he says.

Already a regular user, Josh welcomed the available support and guidance when he needed it. Based in a deprived part of Suffolk, his library benefits from a coordinated county-wide health and wellbeing policy funded by the Mental Health Pooled Fund, which is a combination of Suffolk County Council and Suffolk’s Clinical Commissioning Group.

He was eventually allowed to swap school days for days in the library – and the impact on his learning has been considerable: “Because I don’t have to go into school much, I use the library to do my revision. It’s quiet and I find it much easier to study. I am relaxed and calm when I am working because I can take as much time as I want without being constantly rushed.”

When stuck on a difficult maths or English problem, librarians are at hand to guide him towards answers. “They have really supported me,” he says. “They are always there to talk to and help me through a basic part of a question and then will find me a book to help me with the rest. It has given me a lot more confidence.”

A sign of how positive an experience it has been for Josh is that he has now begun volunteering, leading groups of eight to 12-year-olds who have been bullied by older children. “I wanted them to get off the street and come into the library and have a safe space to be,” he says. His idea was to set up an after-school club; by the end of 2016, 20 children were attending every Wednesday.

“It’s great,” says the teenager. “It has given them their own space where they aren’t being picked on by the older children. Before it was a struggle to talk to people because it really scared me. But now I am much more calm and confident.” He smiles: “I seem to be smiling a lot more and am feeling a lot better about life.”

Library cuts harm young people"s mental health services, warns lobby

Sugar lobby paid scientists to blur sugar"s role in heart disease – report

Influential research that downplayed the role of sugar in heart disease in the 1960s was paid for by the sugar industry, according to a report released on Monday.

With backing from a sugar lobby, scientists promoted dietary fat as the cause of coronary heart disease instead of sugar, according to a historical document review published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Though the review is nearly 50 years old, it also showcases a decades-long battle by the sugar industry to counter the product’s negative health effects.

The findings come from documents recently found by a researcher at the University of San Francisco, which show that scientists at the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF), known today as the Sugar Association, paid scientists to do a 1967 literature review that overlooked the role of sugar in heart disease.

SRF set an objective for the review, funded it and reviewed drafts before it was published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which did not require conflict of interest disclosure until 1984. The three Harvard scientists who wrote the review made what would be $ 50,000 in today’s dollars from the review.

Marion Nestle, a nutrition, food studies and public health professor at New York University, said the food industry continues to influence nutrition science, in an editorial published alongside the JAMA report.

“Today, it is almost impossible to keep up with the range of food companies sponsoring research – from makers of the most highly processed foods, drinks, and supplements to producers of dairy foods, meats, fruits, and nuts – typically yielding results favorable to the sponsor’s interests,” Nestle said. “Food company sponsorship, whether or not intentionally manipulative, undermines public trust in nutrition science, contributes to public confusion about what to eat, and compromises Dietary Guidelines in ways that are not in the best interest of public health.”

The cushy relationship between food companies and researcher has been captured in recent investigations by the Associated Press and New York Times. The AP revealed in June that candy trade groups were funding research into sweets. And in 2015, the New York Times showed how Coca-Cola has funded millions in research to downplay the link between sugary beverages and obesity.

The Sugar Association said in a statement that SRF “should have exercised greater transparency” in its research, but also accused the study authors of having an “anti-sugar narrative”.

“We question this author’s continued attempts to reframe historical occurrences to conveniently align with the currently trending anti-sugar narrative, particularly when the last several decades of research have concluded that sugar does not have a unique role in heart disease,” the Sugar Association said. “Most concerning is the growing use of headline-baiting articles to trump quality scientific research – we’re disappointed to see a journal of JAMA’s stature being drawn into this trend.”

The findings were based on documents found by Cristin Kearns, a postdoctoral fellow at UCSF, in library archives.

The scientists and executives involved are no longer alive.

In recent years, the link between fat and heart disease has become a more contentious topic – a 2010 review of scientific studies of fat in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that “there is no convincing evidence that saturated fat causes heart disease”. The role of sugar in heart disease is still being debated.

Sugar lobby paid scientists to blur sugar"s role in heart disease – report

How To Sound Like A Smart Millennial When Hobby Lobby Comes Up At The Fireworks

Millennials are smart. But their voices usually get lost or overpowered by boomer voices. As I was reading through all the coverage about Pastime Lobby, I wondered, “What do Millennial females think about Hobby Lobby?”  I quit wondering and asked two millennials — sixteen and 21 years outdated — what does Pastime Lobby indicate to you (and your generation)?

Adora Svitak is 16 many years old. Her @adorasv twitter profile: I’m a author, feminist, and advocate for #stuvoice and literacy. Addicted to working and semicolons. I spoke at TED ’10, United Nations ECOSOC ’13. Washington State. adorasvitak.com:

When I found out about the Supreme Court’s decision, I was about as far from the United States as could be—sitting in bed in a Vienna apartment. Traipsing about Europe with my family for getaway meant living in a bit of a bubble: a bubble the place maternity leave means receiving one hundred% of your pay for 16 weeks (France), the place the most strong particular person in the nation’s government is a woman (Germany), or the place abortions are covered by public well being insurance (also Germany). To hear that the Supreme Court would enable firms to arbitrarily declare that their “religious beliefs” overrule a woman’s right to self-determination was a wake-up call for me as to how significantly catching up our nation needs to do.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s eloquent dissent points out the flaws in the ruling (e.g., does this indicate that any firm can claim any religious belief to stay away from having to pay for any process or medicine?). Numerous have pointed out that Hobby Lobby employs the excuse of religious ideas to steer clear of funding birth control for ladies, but is somehow okay with vasectomies for males furthermore, its company’s 401(k) program even invests in businesses that produce birth management. Succinctly, this is not about religious freedom. This is about deciding who has management more than women’s bodies: our employers, or ourselves.

What is possibly most irksome to me is the query asked by specific pundits, “Why must companies have to spend for ladies to have consequences-free sex?” These people plainly fail to realize two issues.

one) Birth handle isn’t just about intercourse. What about the girl who has an IUD to maintain from bleeding to a harmful extent since of uterine fibroids? What about the girl who will take birth manage pills to regulate her menstrual cycles?

2) So what if it is about sex? Allow me break it down for you, conservative pundits: girls oftentimes have sex, for enjoyable, without wanting to have infants. And there is practically nothing shameful or wrong about that. Pregnancy need to in no way be equated to some puritanical punishment for recreational intercourse. Birth handle is a important portion of public health, benefiting society overall thanks to fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions. As a young woman coming into university this fall, I know that I want to live in a society that believes what I do with my entire body is #NotMyBossBusiness.

Julie Zeilinger is 21 years previous. Her @juliezeilinger twitter profile: Author, Media Correspondent and Editor in Chief of @The_FBomb. Books include A Little F’d Up and School 101. Coffee addict. Liz Lemon impersonator. juliezeilinger.com

As a rising college senior, I’ve presently been inundated with cautionary tales of becoming female whilst operating in corporate America. Now, thanks to the latest Hobby Lobby ruling, my generation of ladies can add possibly working for organizations whose rights are valued above our personal and the blatant undermining of our overall health and reproductive freedom to the record of our potential expert rewards.

Monday’s Hobby Lobby ruling solidifies the actuality of the war on women in this country, indisputably highlighting the way in which sexism is nonetheless rampant in American society in many approaches.

Initial and foremost, the determination reveals that persistent, blatant ignorance about women’s bodies has infiltrated the law of the land. The Hobby Lobby suit incorrectly conflates birth manage with pregnancy termination by objecting to insurance coverage coverage of IUDs and morning-soon after tablets on the grounds that they are equitable to abortion (a notion scientists have obviously disproven). This conflation ironically ignores the proof exhibiting that access to birth handle really decreases abortion charges and ignorantly overlooks the truth that birth manage is not only utilised for avoiding pregnancy, but also for several health-related circumstances this kind of as endometriosis, PCOS, amenorrhea and beyond.

Past health-related ignorance of women’s bodies, this ruling also signifies a willfully sexist desire to management women’s sexuality. As Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti factors out, “The underlying values that drove this organization to sue – and spurred a national debate – is the belief that girls getting pre-marital or non-procreative sex is incorrect.” Primarily all sexually energetic American women have employed birth handle at some point in their lives for causes that might contain remedy for healthcare situations, but also, importantly, in order to have safe and responsible sex – a decision that, in this day and age, need to be completely acceptable in and of itself. The double standard of this ruling is created specially clear by the reality that Viagra and vasectomies are nonetheless covered under these policies: thus, women’s sexuality underneath this policy is topic to manage whilst men’s sexuality is facilitated.

In addition to ignorance about and paternalistic attitudes in direction of women’s bodies, Hobby Lobby fails to identify the actuality of many American women’s lived experiences. The ruling – hardly for the very first time in American history –essentially privileges the rights of corporate elites above low-earnings men and women. A 2013 report on contraception identified that access to birth control is “uneven and unequal” amongst “economically disadvantaged or otherwise marginalized” ladies in the United States. Ruth Bader Ginsberg highlighted this point in her dissent, stating “the value of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month’s complete-time pay out for workers earning the minimum wage.” Additionally, entry to family members arranging has been located to be economically advantageous for everyone, although barred entry to family members arranging and subsequent unplanned pregnancies amongst lower earnings girls usually even more push them into poverty. And however the religious beliefs of personified companies have been deemed much more essential than avoiding even more poverty amongst minimal-earnings females.

As millennials, it’s difficult to go through headlines that sound more like dystopian horror than reality and watch ignorant, regressive sexism become more ingrained in this country and even now feel hopeful about the long term we’re inheriting. But we have to battle back and have the energy to do so: The millennial generation, which comprised 19 percent of the American electorate in 2012, is 1 of the most diverse as nicely as possibly the most progressive and supportive of equality. We should loudly vocalize these beliefs – via social media, petitions, in our daily lives and beyond — and put them to action by voting for candidates who assistance them. Eventually, it is up to our generation to present the conservative base that supports this decision that their capacity to form this country based mostly on ignorance and privilege is coming to an end.

Join me on Twitter

How To Sound Like A Smart Millennial When Hobby Lobby Comes Up At The Fireworks

Pastime Lobby - Win the Battle, Threat Dropping the War?

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and against the U.S. government in a situation revolving about health care for workers.  I’m a enterprise person, not a lawyer, so to me it was key to realize from a business viewpoint precisely what Pastime Lobby “won.”

What did Pastime Lobby “win”?

It seems Pastime Lobby’s leaders “won” the proper to refuse to provide particular types of well being care to their employees as had been mandated by the Cost-effective Care Act.  The justification largely getting that such well being care (all connected with female birth manage) violated religious beliefs of the business owners.

As a company man or woman I wondered what the end result would be if the subsequent situation is brought to the court by a business owner who takes place to be a Christian Scientist.  Would this following business be permitted to eradicate providing vaccines – or maybe wellness care altogether – simply because the owners really don’t believe in modern health-related treatment options?

This may sound severe, and missing the point revolving all around the controversy more than birth handle.  But not really.  Due to the fact the point of company is to legally develop options for client demands at a revenue.  Performing this calls for performing a good deal of items correct in purchase to entice and retain the correct staff, the proper suppliers and  customers by generating all of them really pleased.  I really don’t recall Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Peter Drucker, Edward Demming, John Galbraith or any other historically noted enterprise writer saying the stage of business to set the moral compass of its customers, suppliers or staff.

I’m not sure exactly where enforcing the historical religious beliefs of founders or owners plays a part in company.  At all.  Even if they have the legal appropriate to do so, is it intelligent company leadership?

English: Pastime Lobby shop in Stow, Ohio (Photograph credit: Wikipedia)

Pastime Lobby competes in a very challenging market, with minor area for errors

Pastime Lobby competes in the extraordinarily difficult retail market place.  The ground is littered with failures, and formerly wonderful businesses which are struggling this kind of as Sears, KMart, JCPenney, Very best Get, and so on.  And lately the sector has been rocked with protection breaches, lowering buyer faith in stalwarts like Target.  And revenue are being challenged across all brick-and-mortar standard retailers by on-line firms led by Amazon, who have much reduce price structures.

All the trends in retail bode poorly for Pastime Lobby.  Pastime Lobby does almost no enterprise on-line, and even closes its retailers on Sunday. Provided buyer wishes to have what they want, when they want it, unfettered by time or place, a classic retailer like Hobby Lobby previously has its hands full just figuring out how to keep competitors at bay.  Consumers do not need significantly encouragement to skip any certain shop in search of very easily available products and quick price info across retailers.

Social trends are also quite clear in the USA.  The excellent bulk of Americans help wellness care for everyone.  Which includes offering birth handle, and all other kinds of women’s health wants. This has absolutely nothing to do with the Affordable Care Act.  Wellness care, and women’s rights to manage their personal reproductiveness, is some thing that is obviously a majority viewpoint – and most folks feel it ought to be covered by overall health insurance.

Is it intelligent to go towards the trends?

So, provided the consumer choices obtainable, is it sensible for any retailer to brag that they are unwilling to supply workers wellness care?  Despite the fact that not tied to any distinct social troubles, Wal-Mart has long dealt with buyer and employee defections due to policies which decrease employee benefits, this kind of as health care.  Is this an situation which is probably to aid Pastime Lobby grow?

Is it smart, as Hobby Lobby competes for merchandise from suppliers, negotiates on leases with landlords, seeks new store permits from regional governments, recruits workers as purchasers, merchandisers, retailer managers and clerks, and seeks consumers who can store on-line or at competitors to brandish the sword of intolerance on a specific situation which upsets the business proprietor?  And 1 the place this proprietor is on the opposite side of public opinion?

Did winning this legal victory support, or hurt, Pastime Lobby?

Long ago a group of retired U.S. military Generals told me that in Vietnam America won each and every battle, but misplaced the war.  Via mind-boggling firepower and manpower, there was no way we would not win any fight mission.  But that missed the level.  As a end result of focusing on the fight, America’s leaders missed the chance win “the hearts and minds” of most Vietnamese.  In the finish America left Vietnam in a rushed abandonment of Saigon, and the North Vietnamese took in excess of all of South Vietnam.  Despite the fact that we did what leaders believed was “right,” and fought every single battle to a win, in the finish America misplaced the goal of keeping a free, independent and democratic Vietnam.

Pastime Lobby - Win the Battle, Threat Dropping the War?

SCOTUS" Pastime Lobby Ruling Implies Little To 9 In ten Employers Previously Offering Contraceptive Coverage

Even though the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on the Cost-effective Care Act’s contraceptive mandate is a victory for two family-owned businesses that explained the law violated their religious freedoms, it’s unlikely to adjust what most businesses have paid for for years.

Even just before the mandate beneath the Affordable Care Act kicked in, almost 90 % of U.S. employers – large and small – covered contraception.  And really number of, or 12 percent, had some kind of restrict on contraceptive coverage, according to a examine of 779 employers by rewards consultancy Mercer in March of 2011.

Contraceptives were covered by 88 percent of respondents with “little variation in prevalence by employer dimension,” Mercer mentioned.

“Only 12% of people providing coverage placed any sort of restrict on the coverage in 2010,” the Mercer report said. “None of the respondents with limits chose to drop coverage in 2011. While ten% dropped the use of coverage limits in 2011, most (90%) manufactured no alterations.”

In a five-four selection, the Supreme Court sided with Pastime Lobby, a craft shop chain, and cabinet maker Conestoga Wood Specialties, which objected to the contraceptive coverage and stated such coverage imposed a substantial burden to their religious freedom. Financial penalties come with the mandate.

Opponents of the choice said it would open the door to extra difficulties but the Mercer examine and other benefits firms say most employers have currently offered broad coverage for contraception and at tiny expense to their employees.

Mercer’s review garnered responses from 157 employers with fewer than 500 staff and 401 respondents with 500–4,999 personnel and 221 respondents with five,000 or far more workers.

Asking yourself how Obamacare will influence your wellness care? The Forbes eBook Within Obamacare: The Repair For America’s Ailing Overall health Care Method answers that query and far more. Obtainable now at Amazon and Apple.

 

SCOTUS" Pastime Lobby Ruling Implies Little To 9 In ten Employers Previously Offering Contraceptive Coverage

The Hobby Lobby ruling proves guys of the law nonetheless can"t get over "immoral" girls having sex | Jessica Valenti

Thirty-5 many years ago, cultural critic Ellen Willis wrote, “it is depressing to have to insist that intercourse is not an pointless, morally dubious self-indulgence but a simple human require, no much less for women than for males”.

If it was depressing in 1979, it seems to be downright miserable right now.

Simply because let us be clear: Even though Monday’s US supreme court ruling in favor of Pastime Lobby was officially about religious freedom, the actual problem at stake is intercourse – namely, if females must be capable to have it as freely as men.

The court ruled – in a 5-four selection in which all the female justices dissented – that a closely-held firm does not have to cover contraception underneath the Inexpensive Care Act. Hobby Lobby argued that, as a corporation, it has religious objections to specified varieties of contraception that it believes are “abortifacients” (they are not). But the underlying values that drove this firm to sue – and spurred a nationwide debate – is the belief that girls possessing pre-marital or non-procreative sex is wrong.

There is a explanation that the very first large-scale cultural response to the situation of insurance coverage for birth management was a female law student currently being named a “slut”. Sandra Fluke’s testimony to a congressional committee in favor of contraceptive coverage for a friend’s serious healthcare condition set off an apoplectic frenzy of sexually-based mostly attacks on her – and they weren’t just restricted to pundit Rush Limbaugh calling her a “slut” and “prostitute” on the air. (Even right now, I still see tweets calling her a “whore”.)

A lot more than 30 many years after ladies thought the proper to birth handle was fought and won, we are still obtaining to justify why we’d like to have intercourse – and why that does not make us negative, immoral or disgusting individuals.

The real issues of conservative “freedom-seekers” are manufactured especially clear in the amicus briefs in help of Pastime Lobby – which sound far more like abstinence-only education curricula than legal arguments.

One particular quick from the Beverly Lahaye Institute and Janice Crouse (who as soon as gave a sex talk to school college students referred to as “False Guarantees, Searing Ache, Tragic Troubles”) insists that the court take into account the “documented adverse results the widespread availability of contraceptives has on women’s capability to enter into and preserve sought after marital relationships”. The American Freedom Center argued that birth control has “harmed girls physically, emotionally, morally, and spiritually”. And attorney David Boyle wrote in his short that contraceptives are not needed, “considering that sexual relations are fundamentally a voluntary activity. … [S]ex is only a human want (like bowling or stamp collecting), not an real need”.

Bowling or stamp collecting. The jokes compose themselves.

Legal decisions about contraception have often been primarily based, at least in element, on issues about women’s possible promiscuity. The supreme court choice in Eisenstadt v Baird that gave unmarried Americans the correct to procure birth manage – in, yes, 1972 – was sparked by the arrest of William Baird after he handed a condom to an unmarried girl at a lecture he was offering about birth manage at Boston University. At the time, his action violated Massachusetts law on “crimes towards chastity”.

Decades later on, we have seen the conservative obsession with women’s sexual purity restrict accessibility to Prepare B and the HPV vaccine – and now it truly is interfering with women’s access to well being care, of which sexual well being is certainly a element.

Dr Nancy L Stanwood, the chair of the board at Doctors for Reproductive Well being, launched a statement on Monday saying that “[c]ontraception is crucial to women’s wellness and effectively-currently being, a critical element of preventive care, and integral to the wellness of families.”

The court put to rest the slippery slope concern many had, stating that the their selection “considerations only the contraceptive mandate” and not vaccinations or blood transfusions. But Louise Melling, the deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, mentioned in a phone after the ruling that this exceptionalism only would seem to apply when it comes to ladies and reproductive rights – or, as lawyer and writer Jill Filipovic tweeted, “Whew, really glad #SCOTUS made positive its #HobbyLobby decision would not negatively effect guys who need to have health-related care some religions object to!”.

And although SCOTUSblog reported that the choice will let for the government to “offer option techniques [for girls] to receive or access [contraception] coverage”, several women’s health leaders I heard from mentioned that is far from particular.

No matter the legal rhetoric, the message about ladies and sex stays the identical. It seems suitable that that quote from Ellen Willis is from the essay “Abortion: Is a Lady a Man or woman?” Since what’s at stake in a choice like this – and in a debate like this – is women’s basic humanity, of which sexuality is an integral part. Yes, contraception is about overall health and females frequently require birth handle for health-related factors – but we also need it for intercourse, and which is just fine.

The supreme court wrote that this selection doesn’t “give a shield for employers who may cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice”. But what else can we phone the focusing on of contraception – and the targeting of women’s well being and lives?

Read through Much more ON Pastime LOBBY:

• Hobby Lobby ruling: Companies can refuse to supply contraception coverage

• Gallery: Reactions to the supreme court’s ruling on corporation’s religious rights

• You advised us: Me and my affordable birth control

• Plus: What Sandra Fluke is aware of about Pastime Lobby

The Hobby Lobby ruling proves guys of the law nonetheless can"t get over "immoral" girls having sex | Jessica Valenti

Nurses" leader to members: do not strike over pay offer lobby your MP instead

‘If you are a nurse, striking indicates abandoning your sufferers,’ Dr Peter Carter advised RCN representatives. Photograph: Alamy

The leader of Britain’s nurses has urged them not to strike above the government’s “insulting” spend provide and advised alternatively they target MPs with marginal seats to consider to force the overall health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, into a rethink.

Nurses would not be justified in taking action, which would be “abandoning” their sufferers, in spite of their rightful deep anger above currently being denied a 1% payrise, Dr Peter Carter, basic secretary of the Royal University of Nursing (RCN), told its yearly congress.

Carter combined a strongly worded assault on Hunt’s “blatantly unfair” determination to reject the NHS spend overview body’s recommendation of a 1% rise for all the NHS’s 1.35 million personnel in England with a heartfelt plea not to walk out in protest.

“I know you’re angry. But nonetheless insulting this government’s pay settlement is, and even so tough that tends to make issues for you, you do want to believe meticulously about any speak of strike action. But if you are a nurse, it implies abandoning your sufferers: leaving individuals babies in the neonatal unit, cancelling that visit to an elderly patient in the local community, strolling out of the emergency department or psychiatric ward,” he advised the four,000 representatives of the RCN’s 400,000 members gathered in Liverpool.

Carter’s intervention comes as other wellness unions – which includes Unison, Unite, the Royal College of Midwives and the GMB – put together either to ballot their members or seek the advice of them about a potential ballot above industrial action brief of and such as a strike. Unions are incensed at Hunt’s determination that only some NHS workers need to get the one% rise, with other individuals missing out due to the fact they currently get boosts to their cash flow by means of the NHS’s extended-established method of yearly shell out increments primarily based on someone’s skills and experience.

Alternatively of striking, nurses should inquire their MP regardless of whether he or she supports nurses obtaining the spend rise and use their electoral muscle – and that of their buddies and relatives – to punish individuals who do not at the ballot box subsequent Could, Carter mentioned.

“There are numerous MPs on all sides of the Residence of Commons that have small majorities, some just a couple of hundred, some even as lower as thirty or 40. There are about one,000 nurses in each and every constituency and if we mobilise ourselves I know that a lot of of people MPs will be seeking in excess of their shoulders and wondering if they will be re-elected at the basic election up coming yr.”

He mentioned nurses should seek to establish the views of all MPs, but afterwards conceded that these occupying the forty most marginal seats could be most well worth pursuing. He advised that nurses target Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs in the coming months as a way of pressuring Hunt to alter his mind.

Offered the latest volatility of politics given that Ukip’s emergence, even MPs with a majority of 2,000 or three,000, who would previously have been regarded safe, may be vulnerable to organised strain, he mentioned. “Now is the time to flush them [all MPs] out to say in which they are standing on well being workers’ salaries,” he additional.

Hunt should not turn into complacent about staff’s deep emotions about NHS spend or “trade” on the reality that he believed nurses should keep away from strike action.

Carter’s phone probably poses a dilemma for NHS unions, which are arranging to consider combined industrial action, if their ballots endorse that. Their present considering is to deploy an overtime ban as an preliminary tactic as a demonstrate of power some time this autumn.

Nurses" leader to members: do not strike over pay offer lobby your MP instead

Families hope "Frankenstein science" lobby will not quit gene cure for mitochondrial disease

Deniz Safak’s situation continued to worsen until finally he died last year at the age of 23.

Deniz Safak was 5 many years outdated when he initial displayed symptoms of the disease that would later on take his daily life. “He started currently being sick and had extreme, stroke-like seizures,” his mom, Ruth, recalled.

Physicians had been baffled by the boy’s situation and it took months before a diagnosis was produced. Ruth and her husband, Erdhal, had been advised that Deniz was suffering from mitochondrial illness, an incurable condition that is passed from mom to little one and can typically be fatal.

Deniz’s condition continued to worsen. By the time he died last year at the age of 23, he had turn into deaf, suffered extreme migraines and was confined to a wheelchair. “That is how he invested his daily life at the finish,” said Ruth, who lives in Sunderland. “He was really vivid and he knew what he was missing from existence.” There is no remedy for mitochondrial condition and, although its signs fluctuate in their severity, the situation is often fatal. Overall health officials estimate that there are a number of thousand people in Britain impacted by the situation, which is induced by mutations in the DNA in the mitochondria, which exist inside the cells of their bodies.

“Mitochondria are the small electrical power packs that offer our cells with energy and they have their own DNA,” stated Professor Douglas Turnbull, director of the Wellcome Believe in Centre for Mitochondrial Analysis at Newcastle University. “The ailment notably has an effect on cells that use a lot of power, like these involved in hearing, pumping blood and firing nerves. About a third to a half of these who have the condition encounter an early death.”

It is a grim scenario. Nonetheless, hopes of tackling mitochondrial illness will be raised in a couple of weeks when the government announces rules that will permit the use of an IVF approach that must rid impacted households of the disorder. If these ideas are accredited by parliament, Britain will turn out to be the very first nation to permit germ-line gene therapy, which will modify the DNA of future generations in buy to eradicate the problem.

The strategy includes taking an egg with wholesome mitochondria from a donor female. Its main set of nuclear genes is then scooped out and replaced with these of a girl affected by mitochondrial illness but whose basic nuclear DNA is healthful. The egg is then fertilised employing her partner’s sperm. In this way an embryo is designed that has the central genes of the two mothers and fathers but no longer carries the mutated mitochondrial DNA as soon as carried by the mother. The technique is acknowledged as mitochondrial substitute. It has in no way been experimented with on humans, but has worked in animal research.

Most scientists and doctors, especially those who work with households touched by mitochondrial ailment, help the introduction of the method. However, some groups vociferously oppose its use. “The social positive aspects for a reasonably modest amount of females … do not come close to to justifying the potential overall health dangers from these techniques to the youngster and the risks to global society that stem from human genetic engineering,” mentioned the campaign group Human Genetics Alert.

Anti-abortion groups also oppose mitochondrial substitute, while some tabloid newspapers have described the creation of embryos making use of the nuclear DNA of two dad and mom and the mitochondrial DNA of a third-get together donor as “three-parent infants” and have claimed that this represents a slippery slope to a “Frankenstein long term”.

This final claim specifically infuriates researchers. “It is wrong to say this generates three-mother or father babies,” stated Turnbull. “Far more than 99.9% of DNA is nuclear DNA and that will not be impacted. Mitochondrial DNA accounts for around .1% of our total DNA. We are altering only mitochondrial DNA. We are not altering a person’s hair or height or eye colour.”

The potential of mitochondrial substitute is demonstrated by means of an additional of Turnbull’s individuals: Marie Austen, also from Sunderland. Her son, Adam, was seven when he was diagnosed with mitochondrial DNA ailment. His heart was subsequently discovered to have been broken but, ahead of he could have a transplant, Adam’s problem worsened and he died final yr at the age of 13. “I wished to see Adam increase up, but that has been taken from me,” mentioned Marie.

Austen has yet another child, a daughter, who at present has no symptoms. Even so, the condition varies in the severity of its signs and symptoms as it passes from generation to generation. This poses problems for Marie’s daughter. “One day she may possibly want to have her own kids, but she will not be able to have them protected in the information that this ailment will not kill them when they are young. That is why I want this new strategy to be given the go-ahead, so my daughter will have healthier mitochondria and can have children who will not die when they are teenagers, as her brother Adam did.”

The ailment is passed via the maternal line simply because males do not pass on mitochondrial DNA to potential generations. Only ladies do that. However, the mutated versions do so with unpredictable consequences. Each Ruth and Marie have severe hearing problems, for example. Even so, the edition picked up by their sons was far worse in its effects.

Final yr the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) completed an comprehensive public consultation on mitochondrial replacement and discovered widespread assistance for it. Now the proposed laws that will let it to be carried out, under licence from the HFEA, are to published. Interested events will give their views on these laws prior to they are debated by parliament, almost certainly on a totally free vote, later on this 12 months.

Alison Murdoch, professor of reproductive medication at Newcastle University,hopes that parliament will approve the new laws – however she is only cautiously hopeful. “This is controversial in some people’s eyes and there will be attempts to block the regulations. My dread is that the government could nevertheless get cold feet and delay the vote, which would not be excellent information provided we will have a basic election following year.

“The difficulties is that the folks who oppose this operate are significantly better organised and proactive than the folks that truly need to have the remedy,” Murdoch said. “They claim that about thirty% of the population is towards this type of healthcare intervention. But when you in fact sit down with a group of men and women and make clear what you want to do, they all say the identical issue: why not?”

Ruth Safak will also be viewing the forthcoming battle above the implementation of mitochondrial replacement treatment. She is passionately in favour of the method. “When you get rid of a youngster, there is not sufficient time to get above it. This point wipes out your lifestyle. The stage is that if this treatment had become offered for me when I was beginning my family members, I could have had Deniz and he would nonetheless be with me now.”

Families hope "Frankenstein science" lobby will not quit gene cure for mitochondrial disease

The alcohol pricing U-turn exhibits the power of the organization lobby | Anne Perkins

‘Investigators have established there have been 130 meetings between the drinks market and coalition ministers, such as two that took spot right after consultation on the proposed minimal pricing legislation had ended.’ Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

A minimal value for alcohol is a single of those policies that seems so wise – the only mystery is that it hasn’t currently been launched. (I speak as one who surreptitiously visits alcohol concern web sites to verify exactly where on the functioning alcoholic spectrum they fit). There are various ways of undertaking it, but in 2012 there was general enthusiasm when the coalition confirmed it would fulfil its pledge to carry in minimal pricing by alcoholic unit. The only question was at what level.

It looked like a carried out deal. Yet within months there were indications that the policy was falling out of favour. In July it was announced – to some shock – that the consultation had produced a clear majority towards and the policy was abandoned.

The charity Alcohol Policy Uk has presently pointed out that while the consultation on the legislation had asked for views on the suitable pricing level per unit of alcohol, the health secretary presented it as if all these who desired a higher level than the 45p proposed had been the same as people who did not want any minimum at all. The “no” vote was added to the “not at this level” vote. Not so significantly massaging the figures as dislocating them.

The most current problem of the BMJ supplies a persuasive explanation for why the government killed off its very own initiative, even although the Canadian encounter is exhibiting what professionals contact “dramatic” benefits to public overall health. Their investigators have established that there have been 130 meetings amongst the drinks industry and coalition ministers, such as two that took place after consultation on the proposed minimal pricing legislation had ended. Probably they have been arranging for the Tory party conference in October, the place drinks giant Diageo was sponsoring a cocktail lounge.

Today, in an astonishingly temperate intervention, Professor Sir Ian Gilmore, the Royal University of Physicians’ alcohol adviser, along with 21 other authorities in public well being and liver illness, have written a letter in the Every day Telegraph suggesting with masterly understatement that big organization may be trumping public well being issues.

It seems to be obtaining trickier and trickier to keep funds and politics apart. Here’s a listing of curious developments in the planet the place the two collide. Plain packaging for cigarettes, yet another instance of David Cameron’s worthy claim of getting in politics to do the correct point, not the popular factor: it went into the wonderful political ashtray final July too. There are recommendations it might come back soon after the election, depending on the proof. Australians seem to be fairly convinced presently. As their former prime minister, Julia Gillard, argued in a blog final month, this is a global campaign towards a single of the world’s biggest industries, and they aren’t going to give up simply. And, while Cameron insists it’s very irrelevant, it need to be comforting for the market that their guy Lynton Crosby is 1 of the prime minister’s closest advisers.

The evidence is that British politics and certainly the great vast majority of British politicians are decent and well-meaning. But the impression is that the hand of big organization is found as well shut, also usually, to huge choices. From finance to housing to healthcare, there are repeated signs of something far more than the shared goals that a rightwing government and personal business could be presumed to take pleasure in. The stupendously misnamed transparency of lobbying bill, now virtually on the statute book, was trailed as the solution. Its weedy, misjudged restrictions on third-celebration action and its partisan assault on the unions will do precisely practically nothing to adjust that impression.

It truly is damagingly straightforward to spot conspiracy the place it isn’t going to exist, all the a lot more so in which voters have become so sceptical about the political approach. Putting it right is going to get a prolonged time. But it would be a start off if the political class would recognise just what they do to public believe in every time they weasel out of undertaking something their backers do not like.

The alcohol pricing U-turn exhibits the power of the organization lobby | Anne Perkins