So what is happening in Indiana?

I read about this last night after a kid I went to undergrad posted a link to it on Facebook. I respect this kid’s opinion, more so now that he has undergone a radical ideological shift. He also hails from Indiana, which means this is probably a big deal.

The Nation had a piece from a few days ago by James Cersonsky and Student Nation on the Indiana University strike. They note that as March Madness ended, most of those in Hoosier country are not happy about the restructuring and gutting that has taken place. Thursday and Friday (yesterday and today), the university has been the site of a statewide strike. The Board of Trustees is holding its annual meeting, and students and staff walked out of class and off the job. Photos of the strike can be found here.

One poster reads:

“The goal is to contest the administration’s efforts to make IU a more exclusive, costly institution, at the expense of students and staff. We have already forced the administration to acknowledge these issues, but through collective action, we want to push further so that we can imagine together a different future for IU.

In addition to a 45 percent increase in tuition and fees over the past six years, the strikers cite issues of diversity and racism:

Recent cuts at IU have disproportionately targeted international students and students of color, college education has been eliminated from Indiana prisons, and immigration laws have been implemented that make an IU education cost-prohibitive for undocumented Indiana students.

Rather than organizing solely around affordability, students list a slate of demands:

1. Immediately reduce tuition and eliminate fees.
2. Stop privatization and outsourcing at IU.
3. End the wage freeze [for faculty and staff].
4. The university must honor its promise to double the enrollment of African-American students to 8%.
5. Support the abolition of both HB1402 [which prevents undocumented students from receiving in-state tuition] and SB590 [an immigration law enforcement bill styled after Arizona’s SB1070].”

They continue:

“These demands are obviously not exhaustive—there’s no way to concisely communicate all the things that need to change at IU. These demands are a starting point, a spark to foster discussion and encourage action. These demands are made not just of the Board of Trustees, but of the entire state bureaucracy that the Board is part of.”

IU campus activists have spent the last six months organizing the strike. On Monday, strikers called for the university not to retaliate against non-student strikers. More than 100 faculty have signed a petition in solidarity with striking students and calling for the university not to punish them for walking out. This is all accompanied by other actions and “Free University Days” organized by grad students and instructors. Some things to note:

• Public service workers in Indiana aren’t legally allowed to strike.
• Faculty are prohibited from using “faculty LISTSERVs and emails to promote organization around the proposed student strike.”
• As of yet we don’t know how much of this is student driven.

More women's health news from Indiana

More news from Indiana, but this time it is good.

RH Reality Check’s Senior Legal Analyst JessicaMason Pieklo wrote a brief article on the ruling that Indiana can’t eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood. 

“The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the core portion of a preliminary injunction and ruled that Indiana cannot cut off funding for Planned Parenthood or any qualified health care provider because the organization provides abortion.” Snap. 

The law, HEA 120 bans abortion providers from receiving Medicaid funds for any medical services. This was the first of many attempts to de-fund Planned Parenthood. So Indiana like so many other states has decided that women’s health is fair game in politics. 

This is victory comes the day after Mourdock’s statements. Friday a federal judge granted an injunction blocking a similar law in Arizona to de-fund the Planned Parenthood. In August, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Texas’ funding ban (which is going to be disastrous results for women particularly poor women). However, the seventh Circuit and the Fifth Circuit split on the legality of these laws, specifically the constitutionality of these “indirect funding” bans, which could result in the Supreme Court settling the matter.

Pregnancy from rape as God’s will?

I don’t know if Republicans are at the bottom of the barrel and just can’t find any candidates that aren’t idiots or if they actually believe the stupid things these representatives say. Richard Mourdock, the Indiana Republican Senate candidate and more importantly friend to women, is being ridiculed for his comments suggesting pregnancies which result from rape is God’s will.

Mourdock was asked about his position on abortion, and he responded by saying the only time abortion is ok is when it saves the life of the mother, “I know there are some who disagree, and I respect their point of view, but I believe that life beings at conception. The only exception I have to have an abortion is in the case of the life of the mother.” He added, “I struggle with it myself for a long time but I came to realize: Life is that gift from God that I think even if life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that is it something that God intended to happen.”

The Indiana Democratic Party and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington jumped on the comments as we did with Todd “Legitimate Rape” Akin. Dan Parker, chairman of the Indiana Democratic Party said, “As a pro-life Catholic, I’m stunned and ashamed that Richard Mourdock believes God intended rape.”

Mourdock’s camp immediately put out a statement to clarify his original statement and reject the Democratic outcry. The statement reads, “God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that He does. Rape is a horrible thing, and for anyone to twist my words otherwise is absurd and sick.”

Mittens has distanced himself from Mourdock after all this, but he had just cut an ad with him last week, so sucks for you. Mitten’s spokeswoman Andrea Saul said, “Gov. Romney disagrees with Richard Mourdock’s comments, and they do not reflect his views.”

The debate consisted of Mourdock, Democratic opponent Rep. Joe Donnelly, and Libertarian Andrew Hornnig. Mourdock and Donnelly are closer than they should be given Mourdock’s idiocy.

I originally read about this on Politico.

Oh, where to begin? Well, first let’s suspend belief and assume there is a God, a male god, who has a will. We’re making the same assumptions as Mourdock. Pregnancy as the result of rape is God’s will because otherwise God would have stopped the implanting of the fertilized egg. I think this is what Mourdock is going for. However, by Mourdock’s clarification fertilization is where God’s will starts. God had no will to whether the woman was raped in the first place. There seems to be a flaw in that logic, but we’re talking ‘God’s will” so I’m sure this will get crazier before it gets better. However, couldn’t the same be said for birth control and abortion? God had a plan for both to be developed, and thus ending a pregnancy resulting from rape would be God’s plan too. Essentially, devolving into a ‘I know what my fictitious God wants better than you do’ being discussed by a whole bunch of dudes.

Or we could use our reason and assume women are people and not just breeders and incubators. That pregnancy resulting from rape and incest like all pregnancy should be about what the woman pregnant wants and is best for her and her family. Moreover, women shouldn’t be forced to (and some could argue as a form of punishment) carry their rapists’ children.

I don’t understand why we are having these conversations. I’m at a complete loss except that there is no alternative for men. Yes, men can be raped and that is awful too, but outside of STIs, men can’t be forced to carry the visible burden that women are and then forced to be responsible for said burden. Well, I’ve struggled for a long time too, dealing with idiots that seem to be out breeding us, maybe views like Mourdock and Akin’s have something to do with that. Let's all agree Republicans should stop talking about issues that involve women.

What exactly is attempted feticide and murder?

Next week Bei Bei Shuai will have spent a full year jailed in Marion County, Indiana. She is being prosecuted for attempted feticide and murder. And if you're like me, you're thinking, well what's take? Attempting suicide while pregnant. 


Briefly, Shuai was working in Indianapolis with her boyfriend, Zhiliang Guan, and they were 8 months pregnant. He then told her that he was married and had another family, and he was going back to them. She begged him to stay, and in response he threw money at her [stay classy, tool]. She then took rat poison and wrote a letter in Mandarin saying she and her baby were going to hell or specifically, "take this baby with me to Hades." Her friends were able to rush her to the hospital where she was saved and her baby, Angel, was delivered 8 days later. Angel then died of a cerebral hemorrhage within four days. 


Three months later, prosecutor, Terry Curry (D.) brought charges against Shuai claiming the rat poison could have killed her baby. If convented, she could get 45 to 65 years in prison. 


So very much wrong with this...

• Suicide is the result of mental illness, depression, and emotional distress. Anyone considering suicide needs compassion and treatment regardless of if they have an occupied uterus. 

But if Shuai is convicted, what pregnant woman will seek help? “Every major medical and public health organization that has considered the issue has concluded that it is dangerous for maternal and fetal health to hold women criminally liable for their pregnancy outcomes,” says Emma Ketteringham, director of legal advocacy for National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW), which is co-counsel to Shuai’s defense. 

• But we're more and more likely to punish women for their behavior while pregnant. 38 states have declared the fetus (the embryo or fertilized egg) a separate victim in cases of homicide. Now, that is supposed to be to protect the mothers from violence specifically abusive partners, not the women themselves. 

But that is what has happened, as the antiabortion forces have gained power. “The prosecution’s legal arguments are exactly based on legal arguments behind the personhood measures now moving through the states,” Lynn Paltrow, executive director of NAPW, told me by phone. “They treat the fetus as completely separate within the pregnant woman. How can you be separate and within?”

So yeah, we all know the danger here pertaining to the anti-choice agenda. However, these personhood laws also mean women could be charged for all conduct during pregnancy if the prosecutors think that behavior could result in a bad outcome. Now, remember 15-20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, 1% end in stillbirth, and 19,000 end in neonatal death. 

Women could be arrested for miscarriage if someone thinks their behavior lead to it. 60 women in Alabama have been charged for harming their fetuses, the article implies because of their drug use. 

A woman could be charged for attempted murder if she attempted suicide when still eligible for an abortion or even before she knows she's pregnant. 

Shuai was granted bail on appeal, which might be the first time a defendant in a murder case in Indiana has won that in a 100 years. The court of appeals refused to dismiss the case. Currently, Shuai remains in jail. 

The ramifications of something like this are seriously disturbing. Women could be charged for miscarriages. Yeah, people shouldn't do drugs because they are illegal, but what about smoking and drinking? I know lots of women who didn't realize they were pregnant right away. This is just crazy. Also, the article doesn't mention anything about mental health services being made available for Shuai, which I imagine she needs right now. 

http://www.thenation.com/article/166664/protect-pregnant-women-free-bei-bei-shuai

Planned Parenthood, who needs it?

Not Indiana, Kansas, or North Carolina.

Yep, we're up to three states that have decided the Planned Parenthood is no longer needed. Hopefully, this means that these states will cease all procreation. Tennessee is fighting over it as well. So I'm sure there will be more coming.

The Planned Parenthood in North Carolina is saying without state funding they will have to cut teen pregnancy prevention programs, adolescent parenting programs, and force poor people to pay for services. Yeah, teens and poor people will suffer, well, not like they vote anyway.

The Hyde Amendment prevents state and federal funds from being used for abortions anyway so cutting the state funding will impact everything but abortion...I'm glad these conservative tools are getting what they wanted. Fortunately, the North Carolina Planned Parenthood will still be able to serve Medicaid members, unlike Indiana's Planned Parenthood. Indiana's Planned Parenthood received $116,000 from around the world to allow them to continue serving Medicaid patients for more than a month so time will tell if North Carolina's Planned Parenthood feels the love. Gov. Bev Perdue vetoed the bill, but it was overridden in the House and is expected to be overridden in the state Senate today.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/15/north-carolina-planned-parenthood_n_877462.html