Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Gonna Have to Start Watching Footba… | Traffic Report »

Monday, January 24, 2011

Olympia Today the Legislature Will Learn How Limited Service Pregnancy Centers are Endangering Women's Health

Posted by Elaine Rose on Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:03 AM

This post is by Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes! Washington.

You’re young, have little money, no health insurance, no doctor and you think you might be pregnant. You see a sign in front of what looks like a health center near your house that says: "Free Pregnancy Tests, Pregnancy Options Counseling." You make a plan to go as soon as you can. You’re thankful there’s a place so close by, and it seems like they wouldn’t mind that you don’t have insurance.

There are many women in Washington in just this situation. Women who are scared, have few resources, and are in need of help. Unfortunately, increasing numbers of women in desperate circumstances are walking into limited service pregnancy centers and are not getting what they bargained for.

Limited service pregnancy centers, also known as crisis pregnancy centers, offer pregnancy tests (often the kind you buy at the drugstore) and sometimes ultrasound imaging or sexually transmitted infection testing, but no other medical care. The centers are opposed to abortion, and do not offer referrals for abortion services. They also don’t provide information about birth control or access to it. Women go to these centers seeking medical care and unbiased counseling about their pregnancy options. Instead these centers, masquerading as health care providers, withhold women’s pregnancy test results, deny needed referrals and provide no guarantee that their medical privacy will be protected. There are at least 46 of these centers in Washington in 21 counties. A report released today by Legal Voice and Planned Parenthood details women’s experiences at these centers.

Our country and state have clear standards for health care providers and patient protection. Laws govern who can practice medicine, there are disciplinary committees for providers who do not meet standards of practice, and we have laws like HIPAA to protect patient privacy.

All of us, when we visit our doctor or a health center, assume we’ll receive real medical care, and that services will meet an acceptable standard. Usually this is true. But while limited service pregnancy centers may look like health centers, the standards we all depend on to protect our health, rights and privacy are not being met.

All women deserve to know what services are available when they walk into a place that appears to be a health care provider. This shouldn’t be a mystery for anyone—especially women who don’t have the time or money to keep searching for health care.

All women deserve to get pregnancy test results right away—regardless of what choice they make about their pregnancy. Imagine a woman who has a health condition that makes pregnancy dangerous—a diabetic, an epileptic or someone who has a lowered immune system. And imagine that woman being told to come back in two weeks for a pregnancy test result that is available in one minute. Nobody, especially a woman whose pregnancy is high-risk, should be delayed when seeking pregnancy or abortion care.

All women deserve to have their medical privacy protected. Consider a domestic violence victim whose abuser gets her pregnancy test results. Or a teen whose parents have promised to throw her out of the house if she gets pregnant? Right now there is nothing stopping limited service pregnancy centers from disclosing confidential health information which could put women’s safety at risk.

All women deserve privacy, fairness and honest information about their healthcare.

Today the legislature is considering HB 1366, The Limited Service Pregnancy Center Accountability Act.

The bill would: require limited service pregnancy centers to protect the privacy of health care information collected from persons seeking services; require the centers to provide pregnancy test results immediately; require a center to disclose that it does not provide services or referrals for abortion or comprehensive birth control, and that it does not provide medical care for pregnant women.

It’s time we hold limited service pregnancy centers accountable for women’s health and well-being.

House Bill 1366 is scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Health Care & Wellness at 1:30pm this afternoon.

FacebookShare

Comments (32) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

I would also require that the operators suddenly swerve their cars whenever presented with the danger of crashing into an acorn.

Posted by Gerald Fnord on January 24, 2011 at 6:16 AM

I would hope that by "disclose," you mean "has to be part of the signage." Disclose is a pretty nebulous term, it could be that these centres only have to tell women when asked...in a stressful situation, not every woman would remember to ask up front what services are provided. They should be have to say on the outside of the building "No birth control or abortion referrals. Pro-life counseling only."

Posted by Canuck on January 24, 2011 at 6:25 AM

Who will speak for the 400,000 American women killed every year by abortionists?

Does Elaine care about their health?

Posted by Hired Killers on January 24, 2011 at 6:55 AM

Thanks for the reminder... PP donation check going in the mail today!

Posted by cantremembermylogin on January 24, 2011 at 6:56 AM

Wait, so what do they do regarding not keeping health information private?

I just started working in a medical records dept and had to have hella HIPPA training. It's serious business. What gives?

Posted by internet_jen on January 24, 2011 at 7:15 AM

@5 - i'm not an expert, but i'm pretty sure it's because they're not licensed medical care centers, so they don't fall into the category of providers that are required to adhere to HIPAA.

Posted by AmyC on January 24, 2011 at 7:29 AM

@3 Abortionists? Seriously?

Yeah, its horrible that women's bodies aren't controlled directly by the State for Jesus, isn't it.

Posted by bgk on January 24, 2011 at 7:36 AM

@5: This bill will close that loophole. Write to your legislators today to demand that they support it. Go here to find your legislator. Your two representatives and state senator will come right up, so click on one of their names and you'll be sent to their home page. Then you can click on the "email" button, and you'll be given an option to send a copy of the email to the other two legislators.

They need to hear from all of us that this is important.

Posted by TVDinner

on January 24, 2011 at 7:42 AM

Do these places conduct pelvic exams?

Because if they do, and there's no licensed doctor or nurse, then isn't there grounds for sexual assault charges?

Posted by seatackled on January 24, 2011 at 7:45 AM

I hope this bill passes. I hope that the abortion language doesn't hold it up. All of the protections in this proposal are equally important.

Posted by PTrig on January 24, 2011 at 8:06 AM

@3, Can you give us a reliable source for that statistic because I'm skeptical. It sounds like a made up propaganda number.

Posted by Aurophobia on January 24, 2011 at 8:10 AM

Our local conservatives are already up in arms over this, apparently: http://soundpolitics.com/archives/014545…

Posted by Joe Szilagyi

on January 24, 2011 at 8:11 AM

7
yeah, well, that would be scary.

good thing these women have complete control of their own bodies...

now if they could just figure out how that damn baby they're so eager to kill got in there....

Posted by toilet seat on January 24, 2011 at 8:13 AM

9

yeah, great idea.

sort of like the way you sexually assault yourself every time you wipe your ass

Posted by once a week? whether you need it or not? on January 24, 2011 at 8:15 AM

11

let us help you out.

there are 800,000 abortions in the usa annually.
have of those slaughtered people are female.
800,000 divided by 2 is about 400,000.

see?

Posted by Reliable Source on January 24, 2011 at 8:17 AM

I want to see statutory damages for the harm they inflict upon already desperate women.

Holding people accountable for the harm their speech causes does not contradict the first amendment.

Posted by wl on January 24, 2011 at 8:19 AM

16

lucky for you.

otherwise you might have to sue yourself for the stupidassed shit you vomit out your piehole.

Posted by cleanup on aisle 3 on January 24, 2011 at 8:24 AM

@12 What a wasteland of hate (the link), ugh. Nice fight though.

Posted by Danger on January 24, 2011 at 8:25 AM

I put up these two links on Friday in comments to Cienna's post. Each appears to list more than 60 "pregnancy centers" of this type in Washington state:

http://www.fpiw.org/crisispregnancycente…

http://ramahinternational.org/washington…

Posted by rob!

on January 24, 2011 at 9:42 AM

@15: I don't even know where to begin, but this is as good a place as any to start:
"800,000 divided by 2 is about 400,000."
No, 800,000 divided by 2 is EXACTLY 400,000, not "about 400,000", you semi-literate twit.
And now I'll just greentext the rest.
>abortions
>slaughtered people
>people
>abortions
Really, bitch? By which basis are embryos people?

In before shitstorm.

Posted by venomlash on January 24, 2011 at 9:58 AM

TVDinner: Thanks much for the link. That made it really easy to send feedback--more support than a call-to-action, since my two reps are sponsors of the bill. Still.

Posted by leek on January 24, 2011 at 10:14 AM

20

Interesting question, junior.

In some Asian nations boys are born as much as 20% more often than girls. As a result there are tens of millions of 'missing' young women in those countries.

Sex-selection abortion is credited with the difference.

But that seems impossible-
something clearly is happening to female humans,
but what possible connection could there be
between the destruction of
a few undifferentiated cells,
a pseudo-tumor,
a clump of matter no more signifcant that toenail clippings;
what connection could there possibly be
between this
and tens of millions of missing Women?

Does Planned Parrenthood, in addition to caring about matters that endanger women's health, also care about Tens of Millions of Missing Women?

Perhaps Elaine could look into why/how Tens of Millions of Women have gone missing.....

Posted by . on January 24, 2011 at 10:47 AM

See? Acorns are oak trees, and should be treated as exactly the same.

Posted by Gerald Fnord on January 24, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Not only do they endanger women's health, they also increase the burden on all of society.

A typical pregnancy costs more than $10,000 in total costs to the system. If you're wondering one of the drivers of cost escalation, it's uninsured women giving birth, or underinsured women giving birth.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg.

Oh, and grats to Yoonha on her new baby boy - he is ever so cute!

Posted by Will in Seattle

on January 24, 2011 at 11:22 AM

@22,

If those female fetuses hadn't been aborted, then the resulting babies would have been abandoned or killed. But, as usual, you pro-"life" fucks think life ends at birth.

Posted by keshmeshi on January 24, 2011 at 11:24 AM

@22:Oh Period Troll, as if any one here believes that you give a rat's patooty about the welfare of women! But wait! Perhaps I rush to judgment! After all, now that you support marriage equality, it makes sense that you've come to abandon misogyny as well. So on your way to get Dan and Terry's anniversary gift, don't forget to mail those checks to Planned Parenthood and the National Organization of Women. Welcome aboard Period Troll!
(PS Still with the "Junior"?)

Posted by Lissa on January 24, 2011 at 11:27 AM

@15 There could be a lot fewer than 800,000 abortions a year in the U.S. if these "crisis pregnancy centers" would actually offer comprehensive birth control. Planned Parenthood has prevented more abortions than any other organization on the entire planet. Maybe you should consider joining...

Posted by Biologist in the stix on January 24, 2011 at 11:29 AM

@22 It's ironic that you bring up the 200 million missing women worldwide. Stripping reproductive choice, forcing women to carry pregnancies, and treating female bodies as slaves to fetuses is the very idea that leads to women being treated as disposable. If we have no autonomy over our own bodies, why would anyone else respect our bodies?

Posted by kersy on January 24, 2011 at 11:49 AM

could'uv...

would'uv......

if only....

Posted by ....you got NOTHIN' on January 24, 2011 at 2:43 PM

@29: It's funny that you say that, as your entire argument against a woman's right to rule over her uterus is based on what a mindless clump of cells "could'uv" or "would'uv" become "if only" they hadn't been terminated.

Posted by venomlash on January 24, 2011 at 7:37 PM

30
ah- our tedious clueless slow learner......

@27 " There could'uv been a lot fewer than 800,000 abortions a year in the U.S. if these "crisis pregnancy centers" would actually ...blah...blah..."

@25-"If only those female fetuses hadn't been aborted, then the resulting babies...blah....blah..."

Posted by junior, you're embarrassing red.... on January 25, 2011 at 3:52 PM

@31: Read what I posted previously and get back to me. (PROTIP: your arguments are based entirely on "could'uv", "would'uv", and "if only", so it is the pinnacle of hypocrisy to attempt to call anyone else out on using such reasoning.)

Posted by venomlash on January 26, 2011 at 8:21 AM