Speaker Jessica Valenti caused quite a stir across the campus of SDSU last Tuesday. Whether the comments were positive or negative, Valenti definitely raised some serious debate about the subjugation of women. But let’s focus on the positive: a male who had no choice but to go to the speaker for class credit sat next to me. When we left, he had nothing but good things to say.  He had never even thought about the discrimination in different fashions, literally. Jessica displayed some alarming graphics including t-shirts targeted at young girls boasting messages like “no means no, well unless I’m drunk” and “who needs brains when you’ve got these” written across the bust.
 
Valenti spent most of the night discussing her latest book, The Purity Myth. She explained the concept of Purity Balls, where girls pledge their virginity to their father until they are married. Barf.
 
The Q and A session of the night was interesting. One woman stated that she was 24, Catholic, a virgin, and disease free and she is proud of it. “So why is that so bad?” she asked. Valenti again tried to explain her point: It is not bad in any way, but why is not being a virgin so bad?
 
One of Valenti’s visuals included a bouquet of roses with a card describing the problem with pre-marital sex: every time you engage in sexual activity before marriage a petal falls from your rose. “Don’t leave your husband holding a bare stem.” One of the fraternities on campus took this explanation literally by handing out roses to women on Wednesday with notes that claimed You’re worth the wait.  The implication that non-virgins are not worth the wait is damaging and particularly irritating coming from fraternity brothers who notoriously celebrate precisely the kinds of attitudes embodied in the shirts that Valenti finds problematic.
 
I think Valenti broke some ground in our conservative little bubble that is SDSU. Liz Jeppesen, President of the Campus Women’s Coalition wrote that “It takes a lot for most people in South Dakota to start a serious, intelligent discussion about feminism and media images.”  Valenti was hilarious yet strong on all of her points. Women are worth respecting no matter what decision they make and you can still be a great person even if you are not “Pure.”

Check out more of Jessica Valenti's work on Feministing.

Education and Outreach Department

Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota

My name is Frederick and I'm the community Initiatives Manager for Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota. Last Tuesday, I was honored to testify to the Minnesota Senate Health, Housing and Family Security committee on the need for comprehensive sexuality education, specifically in the immigrant community. SF 2645, the Responsible Family Life and Sexuality Education Bill, would give Minnesota teens the knowledge they need to avoid unintended pregnancies and STIs, and help promote healthy relationships. You can check out a video of my testimony below or click here to download the full version of my testimony.

According to a study conducted through the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction website, almost 45% of men surveyed reported dissatisfaction with the last condom they used during sex within the past three months. Encompassing 436 men ranging from 18-67, these men also revealed that condoms were 2.5 times more likely to break. 

Although at first glance ill-fitting condoms do not seem to be a big issue, producing condoms that leave customers frustrated and irritated with use can spell out a number of greater problems later. Opting not to use protection, removing the condom before the sexual act is completed, or having the condom break can result in the spread of STIs or pregnancies .

Condoms have always been a popular form of birth control, for their simplicity and affordability, as well as effective protection against sexually transmitted infections. The fact that nearly half of the population of men surveyed was not happy with the condoms they were using surprised me. As the article states, it's a public health concern to ensure quality and suitably-sized condoms are made available for men. It would be interesting to know what brands of condoms these men were using or whether the condoms were ill-fitting because they were too big or too small. Regardless, unless it is designed well, people will find an excuse not to use it even if it's the only form of protection they have.

That this trusty old method could be come under fire by its consumers intrigued me into digging a bit into the history behind condoms. Or in this case America’s most popular brand, Trojan. Currently, Trojan condoms are manufactured by Church and Dwight Co., Inc. (also the makers of Arm & Hammer!) after its acquisition of the parent company in 2001.

Trojan has been sold in the United States since 1927, originally by Youngs Rubbers. The company was started by a New Yorker named Merle Leland Youngs. Prior to this, condoms were linked to a seedy image. To sell his product, Youngs simply marked his packages with the image of a Trojan helmet as a symbol of protection and virility. This was at the end of WW1, when returning soldiers were also coming back with a number of venereal diseases, such as syphilis.

Today, Trojan accounts for 75% of condom sales in the US, followed by Durex at 15% and LifeStyles at 9%. According to its website, there are over 30 different types of condoms produced by Trojan, and each condom is individually tested for quality. World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines require condom tests to measure the durability of a condom against factors of pressure, temperature and volume. With Trojan alone offering over 30 types of condoms, one would think that there would be a condom that could meet each person’s expectations. With the risk of potential unplanned pregnancy or STI transmission, it is crucial that people find a condom that works best for them.

Ironically, as a brand historically lauded for its reliability, Trojan appears to be losing touch with its original function, if those dominating sales have anything to say about what brand the men from the study are using. Maybe Trojan should bring the focus of condom designs back to comfort and fit.

For more information on the proper use of condoms check out the following sites:

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/condom-10187.htm

http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm

For more info on the history of condoms, check out this interesting article in the NY times about a Condom History exhibit at the Museum of Sex in NYC.

The South Dakota Legislative session finally heated up (in a good way) with a flurry of activity around our pro-active legislation, HB 1156 – Contraceptive Equity. After being deferred in committee for several weeks, HB 1156 was put to vote in the House Commerce Committee. Bill sponsor, Representative Joni Cutler delivered an eloquent and well-researched rebuttal, answered thoughtful questions from the committee, and lead an emotional committee discussion. Unfortunately, the bill was deferred to the 41st day by one vote. (This is the polite way to do away with one’s bill without actually killing it.)

Later that afternoon, HB 1156 was “smoked out” of committee gaining over the 1/3 of votes needed to revive a piece of legislation. The House Commerce Committee moved it to the Floor of the House with a recommendation of "DO NOT PASS." The first vote -- to strike the "NOT" and move the bill to a debate on the House Floor – failed. HB 1156 is finished.

The final vote was 30-38. We will continue to focus throughout the year on educating the remaining Legislators on the common sense of supporting Contraceptive Equity in South Dakota.

The following Representatives voted to move the legislation to the House floor for full debate. We are thankful that they respected the women of their districts enough to move forward.

Blake, Conzet, Cutler, Dennert, Elliott, Engels, Fargen, Feinstein, Frerichs, Gibson, Hunhoff, Iron Cloud, Killer, Kirkeby, Lucas, Lust, McLaughlin, Moser, Nygaard, Pitts, Romkema, Schrempp, Solberg, Sorenson, Street, Thompson, Turbiville, Vanderlinde, and Wismer

Reps. Hunt and Russell were excused. Click here for the full list.

The Minnesota Department of Health released figures last month showing an alarming increase in HIV infections among young Minnesotans, with new HIV cases in the state increasing by 13 percent in 2009, marking a 17-year high. 

In addition, the state has seen successive increases in the rates of STIs over the past several years.  Last April’s 2008 STI report showed the highest level of infections ever, with over 17,000 cases reported.

STI rates are highest in the urban areas; however the rates of chlamydia and gonorrhea have increased the most in metro-area suburbs and Greater Minnesota.

“The persistent increase in STIs across Minnesota must be addressed and the public health community cannot do it alone. Minnesota policy makers must respond swiftly and strategically with evidence-based approaches that will effectively address this public health crisis.  Doing so will result in a healthier Minnesota,” said PPMNS President and CEO Sarah Stoesz.

More than 94% of Planned Parenthood’s 64,000 patients are women, the majority of whom are young adults, and 19% of whom are from communities of color. This population - female patients aged 26 and younger - are at the greatest risk of acquiring an STI. Many STIs s can cause permanent damage if not treated early. For example, women infected with gonorrhea or chlamydia are at risk of developing pelvic inflammatory disease.  Long term complications may include infertility, chronic pain and ectopic pregnancy and a significantly increased risk of acquiring HIV.

The report calls on the State of Minnesota to enact a comprehensive, evidence-based approach to reducing the state’s rising STI rates, including HIV infection. These rising rates of infection are a significant health threat to Minnesotans. Planned Parenthood urges the State to take the following steps to strengthen its prevention efforts:

•  
  • -Provide funding to address the unmet public health need for STI testing and treatment.  There is currently no dedicated state funding for screening and treatment of chlamydia and gonorrhea infections.
    
    -Require the Minnesota Department of Health to implement an HIV and STI public education campaign, complete an assessment of the necessary steps required to significantly reduce the state’s STI rates within five years and determine the total annual cost to the state's health care system of STIs, treated and untreated, occurring in adolescents and young adults. 
    
    -Provide for school-based, age-appropriate comprehensive sexuality education programming that would offer young people the information and means to protect themselves. 

Planned Parenthood administers approximately 62,000 STI tests annually, including HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and HPV.  Planned Parenthood provides reproductive health education programming with a focus on reducing STIs and HIV and unintended pregnancies and provides sex education programs that empower communities to make healthy, responsible decisions about their reproductive health.

CLICK HERE DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

CONTACT: Kathi Di Nicola

651.755.9557

###

 As Midwesterners, we know how to ride out a snowstorm. When the meteorologist gets that twinkle in his eye, we know to stock up on milk, bread, (beer), and other essentials.  I think that’s why I found this post on welovedc.com so funny: bare hooks in the condom isle at a DC Safeway.  Will there be a baby boom 39 weeks from now?  Plan ahead, folks.  Don’t let this happen to you!

Get more information on safe sex and condoms.

For more information on the Teen council, check out their informational video.

North Dakota Public Affairs Manager
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

On January 22 thirty seven years ago, the Roe v. Wade decision legalized the right for American women to abortion.  Despite polarized opposition to the choice of abortion, public health data shows that medically safe, legal abortion has a profound impact on American women and their families.

House Bill 1156 (Contraceptive Equity Legislation) is scheduled for a hearing in the House Commerce Committee tomorrow, February 12, at 10:00 A.M.

The deadline for introducing new legislation has passed. Unless an existing piece of legislation is "hoghoused" (a term used when a bill is gutted and rewritten in committee) we are cautiously optimistic that the 2010 session will be free of anti-choice legislation. We will continue to be ever vigilant in monitoring the action on the House and Senate floors.

Pro-active legislation (Contraceptive Equity) has been introduced by the Campaign for Healthy Families. Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota supports HB 1156, a measure that requires health insurance plans in South Dakota to include FDA-approved contraceptives as a part of any package that provides coverage for prescription drugs.

We have every confidence that this common sense legislation will make it out of committee and we will alert you when it arrives on the House floor for debate.

“The best one we’ve had!” are exactly the words every event organizer wants to hear. The 5th Annual Women 4 Women Day at the capitol in Pierre, SD was a great success. Several important changes were made to this year’s event including scheduling and transportation. A small gathering was added on Sunday after the SDANW board meeting. The Sioux Falls bus was diverted so it could make a stop in Brookings, SD to pick up a group of 13 students from the Campus Women’s Coalition at South Dakota State University. A legislative reception was added at a local restaurant at the end of the day, instead of inviting legislators to lunch (where time is short due to the Democratic caucus starting at 1:00pm.)

Sunday evening, a small group assembled to learn from the legislators. Six female, pro-choice legislators joined us for a panel discussion organized by the SD chapter of the National Women’s Political Caucus. Senators Sandy Jerstad (D-12) and Pam Merchant (D-7), Representatives Suzy Blake (D-13), Peggy Gibson (D-22), Martha Vanderlinde (D-15) and Elaine Elliott (D-2) discussed the pros and cons of running for office as a women and different ways supporters can help.

The bill to repeal the ban on stem cell research in South Dakota had a packed committee chamber by 7:45am Monday morning. The weather made for a rocky start to the day, but the bus made it to the capitol in time for the second round of committee hearings.

Our lunch program featured four members of the Pierre and Rapid City Democracy in Action chapters. Each focused on different aspects of DIA and ended with a rousing call-to-action that set the tone for the remainder of the day. A reporter with South Dakota Public Broadcasting recorded the program and had interviews several guests throughout the day.

After our announcement in the galleries, special guests and former legislators with our group, Casey Murschel and Caitlin Collier were also announced. During the day, participants were able to visit tables in the Rotunda including Planned Parenthood MN ND SD, ACLU-SD, NARAL Pro-Choice SD, National Women’s Political Caucus, SD Safe Childbirth Options, SD Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, League of Women Voters, Democracy in Action and SD Advocacy Network for Women.

A record twenty nine legislators attended the reception at View 34 including gubernatorial candidates Scott Heidepriem and Dave Knudson, Secretary of State candidate Ben Nesselhuf, and US House candidate Blake Curd. The Advocacy Network’s main focus of reproductive rights, equal opportunity, violence against women and education appeals to both Democrats and Republicans and we had a truly non-partisan end to our day.

by Karina
Web Editor
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

Saw a post on the City Pages Blog regarding Al Franken’s speaking appearance and a recent NARAL luncheon honoring the 37^th Anniversary of Roe V. Wade, and I just have to comment. 

The post, “Al Franken, reproductive rights, and a debate that goes nowhere”, pulls a section of Senator Franken’s speech and compares it to an MCCL press release, printed in full, to prove to its readers that “these two camps will never see eye to eye.” 

Via City pages:

This is not news: Both sides of the abortion debate are dug in tighter than a stubborn mule, each fearing any compromise will lead to hell on one side, or a return to the 18th century on the other, and claiming to represent the majority of Americans. 

Having already declared this, “not news,” I’m left wondering what the point of the post was? It seems only to exacerbate precisely the problem that this writer seems to take issue with.

His assertion that each side is stubbornly refusing to compromise is overstated at best, and totally false at worst. 

Both pro-choicers and pro-lifers continue to represent a range of views that do not fit into the black and white paradigm, which he perpetuates.

• -On Common Ground is an ongoing feature from RH reality check, a pro-choice website, that aims to find the similarities between pro-choice and pro-lifers to find common ground to work toward compromise.
• -Pro Life Pro-Obama is a website dedicated to reducing the need for abortion by advocating for better health care, support for parents seeking higher education, and better child care programs rather than banning abortion.
• -Former director of the Common Ground Network for Life and Choice shares her experiences during some trying times in Buffalo, NY.
• -Vice President Biden’s views on abortion further explain the shades of grey when it comes to views on abortion.
• -South Dakota voted against an abortion ban twice, not because they are a pro-choice state, but because they don’t believe the government has a role in the issue.

These are just a few of the many examples of compromise between pro-lifers and pro-choicers.   This is not to say that there aren’t people who are unwilling to compromise. For example, there are countless pro-life legislators who have voted against expanded family planning services,  increased access to birth control, and other initiatives that would actually reduce the number of abortion. These fervently pro-life legislators would rather spend their time trying to pass intrusive laws than actually reduce the abortion rate through positive, preventative solutions.

Planned Parenthood is a pro-choice organization, but respects a woman’s decision to carry her pregnancy to term just as it respect a woman’s choice to have an abortion.  Senator Franken explained in his speech at the NARAL Luncheon:

Now, let me say that there are millions of people in this country who have a sincere objection to abortion, and much of that is based on strongly held religious conviction. And I respect that. In America, we respect each other's religious beliefs. But we are not governed by them.

If there are groups who don’t see “eye to eye,” it’s those who believe in the separation of church and state and those that don’t. For pro-lifers and pro-choicers who actually want to reduce abortion, there’s plenty of room for common ground and compromise.

Ten percent of all U.S. births are to teens. Wow. I did not know that until recently, when I read about a new study from the Guttmacher Institute (pdf). This study proves what experts had long predicted would occur – that teen pregnancy rates have increased after restrictions were imposed on sex education classes in schools during the Bush administration.

The news release about the study states that “The significant drop in teen pregnancy rates in the 1990s was overwhelmingly the result of more and better use of contraceptives among sexually active teens. However, this decline started to stall out in the early 2000s, at the same time that sex education programs aimed exclusively at promoting abstinence—and prohibited by law from discussing the benefits of contraception—became increasingly widespread and teens’ use of contraceptives declined.”

According to the study:

•    The teen pregnancy rate declined 41% between its peak, in 1990 (116.9 pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15–19), and 2005 (69.5 per 1,000).
•    Teen birth and abortion rates also declined, with births dropping 35% between 1991 and 2005 and teen abortion declining 56% between its peak, in 1988, and 2005.

However, these trends reversed in 2006. In that year, there were 71.5 pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15–19. Put another way, about 7% of teen girls became pregnant in 2006.

The reversal in 2006 also involved all demographic groups:

•    Among black teens, the pregnancy rate declined by 45% (from 223.8 per 1,000 in 1990 to 122.7 in 2005), before increasing to 126.3 in 2006.
•    Among Hispanic teens, the pregnancy rate decreased by 26% (from 169.7 per 1,000 in 1992 to 124.9 in 2005), before rising to 126.6 in 2006.
•    Among non-Hispanic white teens, the pregnancy rate declined 50% (from 86.6 per 1,000 in 1990 to 43.3 per 1,000 in 2005), before increasing to 44.0 in 2006.

State-level data are not yet available for 2006, but varied widely in 2005. The highest pregnancy rates were in New Mexico (93 per 1,000 women 15–19), Nevada (90), Arizona (89), Texas (88) and Mississippi (85), and the lowest rates were in New Hampshire (33), Vermont (40), Maine (48), Minnesota (47) and North Dakota (46). Teen pregnancy rates declined in every state between 1988 and 2000, and in every state except North Dakota between 2000 and 2005.

If we continue to move forward, pretending that our teens are not having sex, we are merely sticking our heads in the sand. According to the Guttmacher Institute:

•    By age 15, only 13% of never-married teens have ever had sex. However, by the time they reach age 19, seven in 10 never-married teens have engaged in sexual intercourse.
•    Twelve percent of teen males and 10% of teen females have had heterosexual oral sex but not vaginal intercourse.
•    A sexually active teen who does not use contraceptives has a 90% chance of becoming pregnant within a year.

That last statistic was particularly jarring to me, because it should be easy for teens to acquire contraceptives. The study reveals that only twenty-one states and the District of Columbia explicitly allow all minors to consent to contraceptive services without a parent’s involvement (as of January 2010). Two states (Texas and Utah) require parental consent for contraceptive services in state-funded family planning programs. Based on that information, it is not surprising to me that Texas is among the states with the highest teen pregnancy rates in the nation.

Ninety percent of publicly funded family planning clinics counsel clients under 18 about abstinence and the importance of communicating with parents about sex. What percentage of those clinics counsel teens about effective contraceptive use? Teens do not learn about contraceptive use and family planning unless someone takes the time and care to teach them.   They DO, however, learn about sex without someone actively teaching them. Unfortunately,  gossip, the media, and friends aren’t always the most accurate teachers.

The Guttmacher Institute’s studies make it clear that many teens do not feel they can talk to their parents about sex and contraceptives. In fact, one in five teens whose parents do not know they obtain contraceptive services would continue to have sex but would either rely on withdrawal or not use any contraceptives if the law required that their parents be notified of their visit. The effect of this would only be to further increase the rate of teen pregnancy: pretending that teens do not have sex does not mean that they won’t have sex. Only ONE PERCENT of all teens who use sexual health services say their only reaction to a law requiring their parents’ involvement in obtaining prescription contraceptives would be to stop having sex.

We need to face the fact that merely wanting teens to not have sex is not enough. Ignoring the fact that teens have sex is not enough. Pretending that teens do not have sex is not enough. We need to acknowledge it and provide better options for sex ed, contraceptives, and family planning counseling.  It is only through education and knowledge that we will reverse this trend. According to Heather Boonstra at the Guttmacher Institute, “the heyday of this failed experiment has come to an end with the enactment of a new teen pregnancy prevention initiative that ensures that programs will be age-appropriate, medically accurate and, most importantly, based on research demonstrating their effectiveness.”
 

###

Contact Kathi Di Nicola, PPMNS Media Relations Director: 651.755.9557

PPMNS's President and CEO, Sarah Stoesz, expressed deep concern over today's announcement from the Minnesota Department of Health.

"This increase in HIV infection is a serious public health issue and it's critical that Minnesota's public health community is supported in its effort to tackle these rising rates of HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs).  Today's news demonstrates the need for a coordinated, comprehensive, statewide plan and education campaign", said Stoesz.

"These alarming HIV statistics highlight the acute need for the Minnesota Department of Health to lead the state in developing a comprehensive plan for significantly reducing Minnesota's STI and HIV rates in the next five years.  This plan must include a community education initiative that engages the public in learning about the prevalence and health consequences of untreated STIs, including the risk of HIV transmission,"  continued Stoesz.

Planned Parenthood administers approximately 62,000 STI tests annually, including HIV, Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and HPV.  Untreated STIs significantly increase the risk of acquiring HIV.  Planned Parenthood provides reproductive health education programming with a focus on reducing STIs and HIV and unplanned pregnancies.  Planned Parenthood's sex education programs empower communities to make healthy, responsible decisions about their reproductive health.

"This news underscores what many parents and members of the public health community already know.  Evidence-based, comprehensive sexuality education in schools and community-settings is critical to providing Minnesota's young men and women the necessary information and means to protect themselves," said Stoesz.

##

Contact Kathi Di Nicola, PPMNS Media Relations Director: 651.755.9557

Last minute preparations are underway for the 5th Annual Women 4 Women Day at the capitol in Pierre, SD.  In the last few years this event has included national speakers Christina Page and Sally Roesch Wagner, and rallying to stop both of the 2006 and 2008 abortion bans, but the main purpose remains: engage women to make a difference in their state.

The event is hosted by the South Dakota Advocacy Network for Women, a coalition of groups including local chapters of BPW, AAUW, NARAL, Democracy in Action and proudly, PPMNS Action Fund.  Since 1984, the SDANW has made sure that women’s voices are heard on important women’s issues: reproductive rights, violence against women, equal opportunity and education.  SDANW Co-Chair Shannon Stevens said, "Women 4 Women Day is such an inspiring event.  It's something I look forward to every year.  Not only is it a time to let our legislators know about the issues that are important to us as individuals and as women, it's also a time to build relationships with other like-minded women.  There's a real sense of empowerment after we leave the capitol.”

As many as 200 women and men from across South Dakota have made Women 4 Women Day an annual success.  Aided by free transportation, busloads of constituents make their way to Pierre in February to network, lobby and impact legislation.  This year, the committee added a legislative cocktail reception so the participants would be able to meet legislators in a more relaxed setting, outside of the capitol.

"Citizen involvement is imperative to the legislative process. Lobbyists can talk to legislators all day long, but nothing makes a bigger impact than the communication & grassroots activism of South Dakota people," says Mandy Hagseth, serving as the SDANW lobbyist for a second legislative session.  You can stay up-to-date with Mandy’s activities at the capitol by way of her blog, Live at the Legislature.  

For more information about Women 4 Women Day or to register, please visit www.StandUpSD.com.

by Karina
Web Editor
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

Precinct caucuses are fast approaching! What’s a precinct caucus?

Via the Minnesota Secretary of State:

A caucus is a meeting organized by Minnesota's political parties where citizens can engage each other in a conversation about which candidates to support in the 2010 election and what public policy positions should be adopted as part of the party's platform.

If you consider yourself a Democratic, Republican, or a Green or Independence Party member, then you’ll be caucusing on February 2nd.  Libertarians don’t have any caucuses this year, and Constitution Party’s caucus date is TBD.

The Planned Parenthood Minnesota Political Action Fund hasn’t made any endorsements for the race for Governor yet, but we are asking our supporters to offer and support a sex ed resolution at their caucus. Resolutions are offered as proposed amendments or additions to a party’s platform. Typically speaking, a party platform dictates the values and stances that party members should agree with in order to be considered a member of that party. So by offering a resolution on sex ed, you are helping to elevate the importance of this particular issue to your party. It’s a very unique opportunity to shape the debate and provide direction to an entire field of candidates and the future of your party.

Offering a resolution isn’t as hard as it sounds. I was able to attend my precinct caucus in ’08 and offered a similar resolution on sex ed.  The process was very simple and actually kind of fun. During the caucus, the precinct leaders asked if anyone would like to offer a resolution, at which point I raised my hand. When it was my turn, I read the resolution aloud to my neighbors and I briefly explained why I supported it. My neighbors then got a chance to share their thoughts on the resolution. After I had shared why I supported this resolution, a man who said he was a physician, echoed my support, and further explained why as a physician he also felt that responsible sex ed is important. After discussion, the sex ed resolution passed overwhelmingly. Ta Da!

After a resolution passes, it gradually works its way through the convention system. If people continue to support it, it will make its way into the party platform!

One thing that can be guaranteed: if people don’t offer the sex ed resolution, then there is no way it will end up in the party platform. So give it a shot!

Click here to download a resolution supporting responsible, comprehensive sex ed.

If you’re interested in learning more about the caucus process, the Minnesota Coalition for Responsible Sex Ed and the Minnesota AIDS Project will be holding several trainings throughout Minnesota. Learn more!

Not sure where is your precinct’s caucus going to be held? Just use the Secretary of State’s handy-dandy caucus finder to find out.  

Thursday, January 21, 2010

6-8 p.m.

Azia Restaurant in the Caterpillar Lounge

2550 Nicollet Avenue, Minneapolis

Click here for directions.

If you’re on facebook, be sure to RSVP.

Light appetizers will be served and cash bar available.

A donation of $5.00 is suggested, but definitely not required.

Free parking is available on the street and in the parking lot directly north of the restaurant on Nicollet Avenue.

Hope to see you there!

It seems Senator John Thune is a little confused. 

You see, on Dec 17, 2009, Senators Franken and Snowe introduced the Compassionate Care For Servicewomen Act, which would ensure that women in the military have the same access to emergency contraception that their civilian counterparts do.  

One of Senator Thune’s constituents emailed his response to me:

January 14, 2010

Thank you for contacting me about the Compassionate Care for Servicewomen Act.  I appreciate hearing from you.

The Compassionate Care for Servicewomen Act (S. 2904) was introduced in the U.S. Senate on December 17, 2009 and is currently in the Senate Committee on Armed Services. If enacted this bill would require that emergency contraception, like the "morning after" pill, be made available at every military health care facility.

I respect and value your opinion on this issue and agree that our servicemen and women deserve the best health care available.  However, I have serious concerns over the safety of the "morning after" pill since it is the first drug that the Food and Drug Administration has approved for over- the-counter-use when its lower dosage counterpart remains prescription only.

As Congress considers this issue, I will be sure to keep your concerns in mind. If you would like additional information on my activities in the Senate, please feel free to visit my website, http://thune.senate.gov. Thanks again for contacting me. Please keep in touch.

Kindest regards,

JOHN THUNE
United States Senator

His statement that “…Food and Drug Administration has approved for over- the-counter-use when its lower dosage counterpart remains prescription only” is false.  According to the pharmacy technician I spoke with, there are two different brands of EC on the market:  Plan B, Plan B One-Step and Next Choice.  Next Choice (two lower dose pills instead of one) was only available by prescription, but they finally received their OTC patent in August of 2009.  Next Choice has been available OTC for over 4 MONTHS before my friend received her email.

So, what we can draw from this correspondence is A. Sentor Thune (or Senator Thune’s staff, let’s be honest) doesn’t bother to fact check before communicating with his constituents, B. Senator Thune doesn’t think the women of South Dakota are smart enough to think for themselves and do their own homework and C. Senator Thune doesn’t believe that the Servicewomen of America should have the same rights as teenagers.  

It has been fifteen years since the International conference on population and development was held in Cairo, Egypt. In 1994, member governments meeting in Cairo under the auspices of the United Nations Population Fund agreed to universal access to education, especially for girls, reductions in infant, child and maternal mortality, and universal access to reproductive health. 

Last week, in commemoration of this landmark conference, Secretary of State Hilary Clinton rededicated the commitment of the Obama administration in promoting the rights of women to access reproductive health care and services, especially in developing countries where this rights are impeded by a host of factors ranging from poverty, civil strife, to lack of political will. 

To hear Secretary Clinton say “Reproductive health care is critical to the health of the woman and that women’s health is essential to the prosperity, opportunity and stability of families and communities, and the sustainability and development of nations” was powerful.

The importance of access to family planning education and services especially in developing countries cannot be overemphasized. Women in particular need to have access to family planning education. It can be difference between life and death especially in countries were girls as young as nine years are forced to marry.

During my years working for the Cameroon Family Planning organization in the 1990s, I saw firsthand how a whole generation of young men and women were being affected by unsafe abortion and the lack of HIV/AIDS education. Condoms were a luxury and even where they were available, they were extremely expensive for an average citizen.

Meeting this goal by 2015 will require more that commemorative activities. There must be a concerted effort to engage governments of developing countries to commit to the protection of the reproductive rights of women.   The ratification by all African countries of the Maputo Plan of Action that calls for the Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights of all Africans and having these countries commit to implement its recommendation will be a huge step towards achieving equal rights for women.      

Nations can’t make any meaningful progress if women and girls are not given the needed opportunity to have an education. This anniversary should serve as an opportunity to refocus and reallocate necessary resources to achieve this goal and I am glad that the Obama administration is taking the lead.

The South Dakota legislative session started on Tuesday, January 12.  I bought a Michelle Obama-inspired sweater for the occasion and headed out to Pierre with NARAL Pro Choice SD Director, Casey Murschel.  The drive to Pierre was fraught with adventure, but slippery roads and a broken speedometer were not going to keep us away.  (They did, however, slow the trip enough that we missed the opening gavel and the State of the State address:  our apologies to Governor Rounds.)

I was told that opening day was the day to see and be seen (hence the new sweater.)  With Casey in the lead, I was introduced to State Senators, State Representatives and other lobbyists – oh did I mention I am registered as a lobbyist?  So exciting. 

We also saw many candidates:  Senator Ben Nesselhuf, running for Secretary of State, Senator Julie Bartling, running for State Auditor, and of course, Senator Scott Heideipriem, running for Governor, was there with his wife Susie, son Pete, and campaign manager, Steve Jarding. 

There really was a sense of excitement in the air of the capital.  Everyone was very welcoming and said how nice it was to meet me.  A few of the more seasoned lobbyists said that I should be prepared:  in a few days everyone stops being so polite and gets down to business. 

It’s the down-to-business part that is really exciting.  Right now people are trying to confirm bill sponsors, finish drafting legislation and prepare testimony.  I will keep you updated as much as possible about the goings-on in Pierre and how they affect the reproductive freedom of the women and families in South Dakota.  We have 34 days to go!

A final note about Pierre:  Mad Mary’s Steakhouse is a winner!  I highly recommend it.
 

by Karina
Web Editor
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

“We’re so pleased to have Gov. Tim Pawlenty headline our Campaign for Life Gala,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser told POLITICO. “The governor’s actions on behalf of Minnesota women and unborn children are exemplary.”

Personally, as a Minnesotan women, I couldn’t be more unhappy with the actions that the Governor has taken on “my behalf.” Let’s take a look at some of those actions:

•    Signed the women’s right-to-know act, which instituted a 24-hour waiting period before a woman can have an abortion and also forces a doctor to read biased and scientifically unverified language to women prior to the procedure.

•    Allowed his Department of Health to propagate misinformation about the links between abortion and breast cancer.

•    Provided funding for “Crisis Pregnancy Centers” which pose as legitimate health care centers, but often give out medically inaccurate information and religious “advice.”

Women can at least be thankful for the fact that the Governor didn’t gut the Family Planning and Special Projects Grants that partially fund organizations who provide family planning services.

The Politico article attributes Pawlenty’s latest speaking gig to another attempt toward building his national “brand.”

Thankfully there are nearly a dozen pro-choice gubernatorial candidates who support policies that will actually help women and families in our state through pro-active policies that reduce the rates of unintended pregnancies through improving access to the tools and information Minnesotans need to be healthy.  AND they are actually interested in governing our state!

Help us ensure that we elect one of these pro-choice candidates and make sure that our next Governor is Pro-choice! Visit prochoicegov.mn and make a donation to our Political Action Fund.

After months of speculation North Dakota Governor John Hoeven finally announced his intentions to run for the U.S. Senate. His announcement came of the heels of Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan announcement he would not seek re-election to his seat in November. This unexpected development sent shock waves through the progressive movement in North Dakota.  Senator Dorgan served the people of North Dakota in the United States Congress for three decades. His leadership on four standing committees, most notably Chairman of the Indian Affairs committee, will be a significant loss for North Dakota.

The announcement by Governor Hoeven to run for Dorgan’s seat should put supporters of reproductive health care and freedom on high alert. Governor Hoeven’s public statement on access to abortion care is only in cases of rape, incest or maternal life. Shockingly, in 2007 Governor Hoeven took his anti-choice stand to an unforeseen level when he signed into law an abortion ban known as a “trigger ban”. What this means is an abortion ban will go into effect in the state of North Dakota upon “recommendation of the attorney general to the legislative council that it is reasonably probable that this Act would be upheld as constitutional”. To make matters worse, of the four states with trigger bans, North Dakota’s is the most extreme because it:

•    requires the physician to claim an affirmative defense that the abortion was necessary to protect the woman's life, or in cases or rape or incest
•    doesn't allow a woman to terminate if she is experiencing a high-risk pregnancy
•    doesn't allow women to terminate even if conditions in pregnancy make it impossible for a fetus to survive outside the womb

This law would restrict a doctor's ability to treat a patient and do what is necessary to save the life of a woman. If a doctor is prosecuted for performing an abortion, they must prove that the woman's life was in danger or that the pregnancy was a result of ‘sexual imposition.' This intrusion by the government upon the doctor patient relationship does nothing to prevent the need for abortion, but rather sets up more roadblocks for women seeking safe, legal abortion care and attempts to criminalize the doctors providing it.

The painful irony is just one month after signing the nations most extreme ‘Trigger Ban on Abortion’ Governor Hoeven declared it “Women’s Health week” in the state of North Dakota!!
Stay tuned.

When Congress returns from the holiday recess in the coming week, both House and Senate leadership will meet to review each version of the health care bill and create a final bill. As they work towards the passage of this historic bill, we must continue to put pressure on our elected officials to change the abortion provisions that exist in both versions.

While many know about the Stupak Amendment and its language (pdf) in the House version, the Senate version also contains language that stigmatizes abortion and women's health care. The provision language written by Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) in the Senate’s bill is slightly different, but still puts significant restrictions on abortion. First, it would require individuals with an abortion coverage health plan to provide two separate payments, one for coverage of abortion and another for all other health services. Second, it would allow insurers the ability forgo the abortion coverage all together. With the additional steps put in place not only for women, but also the insurance plans, it is highly likely that many health plans will opt-out of covering abortion in order to avoid the complex payment process. These provisions not only create a completely unworkable system, but also create even more hurdles for women seeking an abortion. President Obama promised that under health care reform, no one would lose the benefits they already have. Yet under both the Senate and House bills, this is not the case. Women should not lose the benefits they currently have today. Learn more the Nelson provision.

As we near the final stretch towards passage of this bill, it is critical that we not give up this fight! We must let our legislators know that this abortion language is unacceptable in a final bill and a woman’s right to health care must be protected. It is not too late to take action!
 
Contact your legislators today!
 

It was a very cosmopolitan Saturday for a friend and me last weekend.  After a quick stop at Queen City Bakery, we attended a meeting of the SD Chapter of the National Women’s Political Caucus.  We were very excited to hear Mandy Hagseth speak about her recent trip to India.

Mandy spent 3 months in Udaipur, India through the Foundation for Sustainable Development where she completed a volunteer internship at Action Research and Training for Health (ARTH), a public health organization that focuses on reproductive-child health and public policy.  Mandy’s dedication to her own education in this field is really amazing – she self-funded her whole trip!

During her brief presentation she spoke of the clinics in the villages, the family planning options available and the obstacles to health care.  What I found most interesting was the communication between the villagers and the midwives.  Through true word-of-mouth, a midwife would be notified about a new birth in their or a near-by village.  Within 3-5 days, a midwife would visit the new mother with information on caring for a newborn, warning signs of infection and answer any questions.  Through her internship, Mandy was able to shadow some of these visits.  Her photographs really captured the care the midwife brought to the new family.  We were also able to see the supplies available and the rugged terrain.  When the road ended – they hiked! 

I felt so fortunate that a presentation of this caliber was available in Sioux Falls and can’t wait to make it to the next NWPC meeting! 

Learn more about Action Research and Training for Health. 
 

by Karina
Web Editor
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

While there has developed a widespread belief that some form of instruction in sexual topics is requisite, no definite program has been developed.

Much attention is being lavished upon the various plans for introducing sex hygiene as a definite subject in the curricula of high schools and colleges but insufficient thought has been spent upon the necessity of similar education in the homes.

Parents are not prepared for the adoption of any radical measures like sex instructions in the elementary schools. Nor do parents feel themselves capable of assuming the role of teachers in this important branch of knowledge

Where the spirit is willing there is a lack of a definite plan. Where the spirit is weak it is too frequently because the obstacles appear insurmountable.

Yep, that pretty much sums up the current state of the comprehensive sex ed debate here in Minnesota—Most people believe that comprehensive sex ed is important (89% of parents in Minnesota), yet there doesn’t seem to be a cohesive, comprehensive plan for ensuring that all teens are equipped with the knowledge to keep themselves healthy (“Experts testified that the current sex education programs in schools are a patchwork”). Some people are freaked out by the notion of sex ed and use extreme examples to scare the general public (For example: Minnesota Family Councils Robo-calls). People believe that sex ed is also important in the home, but parents don’t feel comfortable with being their children’s sex ed instructor (“...parents are looking to the schools to be leaders in this area”). And talk about “insurmountable obstacles”—how about a Governor who has all but refused to sign any bill with the words “comprehensive” and “sex ed” in it.

All of this debate isn’t stopping us though. Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota will once again be supporting a comprehensive sex ed bill at the Minnesota Legislature during the 2010 session. Carried over from the 2009 session, the bill (SF965/HF906) is sponsored by Senator Pappas in the Senate, and Representative Frank Hornstein in the House. Once the session starts, we will be watching this bill closely and working to make sure that this is the year that Minnesota’s teens get a sex ed program that will give them the information they need to make healthy decisions.

Stay tuned, because we’ll need your help!

by Karina
Web Editor
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota Action Fund

On paper, Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher seems to have the clearest shot at early-ballot endorsement. But she's not without problems, and there is any number of candidates trying to position themselves as the consensus candidate who can bring the party together.

The DFL's rules committee, which will meet prior to the April 23-25 state convention, will play a big role in the outcome. If the rules committee sets a low drop-out standard for percentage of votes needed to survive early ballots, the chances of a compromise candidate winning endorsement increases. If a high standard is set, the two or three front-runners entering the convention have the best chance of coming out of the convention with the endorsement.

Our PAC, the Planned Parenthood Minnesota Political Action Fund, has not made any kind of endorsement yet, but all of the DFL candidates have been exceptional advocates for pro-choice issues in Minnesota.  When our PAC does make an endorsement you'll be the first to hear about it!

Speaking of our PAC, we are currently on a mission to make sure that the next Governor in MN is Pro-Choice. Wouldn't that be nice? Minnesota teens could FINALLY have comprehensive sex ed. We could build robust family planning programs that give our citizens access to basic health care. And we wouldn't have to worry about what the next piece of crazy, invasive legislation that anti-choicers cook up. Help us achieve this goal by making a contribution to the Planned Parenthood Minnesota Political Action Fund.

I recently read two articles relating to abortion rights. What was interesting to me is the theme in both articles is very similar - not only has abortion moved from being a political to a personal issue, it is also viewed very differently from two generations of women. The two generations are those who remember when abortion was illegal and those who were born after Roe v. Wade, and thus do not know what a struggle it was to gain the right in the first place.

The first article was from The New York Times.  It discusses a generational divide that exists, as the writer stated, "not because younger women are any less supportive of abortion rights than their elders, but because their frame of reference is different." Because this generation has not known a time when abortion was illegal, they tend to have no sense of urgency regarding the topic. The article states "For many of them, the daily experience is: It's legal and if you really need one you can probably figure out how to get one."

Even the language is different for these generations (those over 30 and those under 30), according to the article. "women…who came of age when abortion was illegal, tend to view it in stark political terms - as a right to be defended, like freedom of speech or freedom of religion. But younger people tend to view abortion as a personal issue, and their interests are different…If you look at people under 30, that is not their touchstone, it is not wrapped up around feminism and women's rights."

The article quotes Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida and chief deputy whip of the House, as blaming what she calls "the complacency of her own generation for the political climate that allowed Mr. Stupak to prevail." Ms. Wasserman Schultz is 43. When older women have warned that reproductive rights are being eroded, she said, "basically my generation and younger have looked at them as crying wolf."

When the article's author discussed the issue with a 27-year old, she said "I think that a lot of younger women do take for granted the fact that they've come of age in a time of post-Roe v. Wade, where they have access to lots of different birth control options."

This sentiment is echoed in the second article, which is from the Associated Press. One (twenty-something) woman who was interviewed for that article stated that "People of my generation do not remember when abortion wasn't safe, legal and available and it's been a shock to think we might not have that right."

Whether it is a shock to think these rights may disappear is not always enough to spur this generation into action on the subject. These women simply do not feel the same sense of urgency regarding this topic.  "For them, abortion is now part of a "reproductive justice" portfolio that also includes access to birth control and improving health care for poor and minority women…Newcomers to the women's movement, secure in the knowledge that abortion is legal, have embraced a broader range of goals under the feminist umbrella, from body image awareness and gay marriage to the raping and genocide in Darfur."

While I am most definitely behind these other issues, I fear a further erosion of abortion rights if we cannot engage the younger generations.  I do not personally remember what it was like to not have access to abortion, but I do remember Roe v. Wade and the difference it made for women's rights in this country. It is difficult for anyone to imagine what life would be like if we did not have access to something that we may take for granted.  But how do we engage the younger generation? How do we convey the same sense of urgency felt by those who remember the back-alley abortions, where countless women either died or ended up sterile, as a result?

According to Jenna Covey of the Minnesota Women's Campaign Fund, "moving beyond abortion rights is essential to attracting a younger, more diverse range of activists to the cause…Abortion is no longer the No. 1 issue. It's about a spectrum of choices, not black-and-white single issues, that will re-engage women in the women's movement."

Is it enough to include abortion rights under a larger umbrella of reproductive choices, or is that diluting the message? When a person is removed from the pain of "before," it is a challenge to convey that sense of urgency.  How can we feel "secure in the knowledge that abortion is legal" when it is constantly challenged? How can we feel secure when we have protestors harassing women who go to our clinics to have an abortion?  How can we feel secure when the religious conservatives have a stronghold influence on our lawmakers, which impacts each and every one of us?

I don't think it is enough to include it in a "spectrum of choices". This is an issue that is constantly under attack, on both a political level and, for those seeking to obtain one, on a very personal level.  It is not enough to say "it is legal and if you need one you can find a way to get one," because if we do not pay attention, very soon it may no longer be, and then we would have to start the fight all over again.

 

There is a real need for better, more targeted sexual education out there. We have a whole generation that is operating under major misconceptions about pregnancy and birth control. That means a large number of unplanned pregnancies and unhealthy sexual practices. No, we're not talking about teenagers; it seems the group that needs the sexual education refresher course are twenty-somethings. According to an article in the Pioneer Press, twenty-somethings are suffering from a severe lack of knowledge and awareness about the realities around birth control. What works, when it works, and how it works are all questions that are not being asked by this group, and that means they are inappropriately using birth control, or not using it consistently enough to make it effective. As the article points out, 70% of the pregnancies in this age group are unplanned.

How did this happen? Has this generation been overlooked and poorly served by their parents and the educational community? How did these myths and misconceptions of birth control get to be so commonly held and treated as fact? Whatever the reason, the point remains that something needs to be done. We cannot have a whole generation operating under, and now creating a new generation of their own, this bad information. They may be adults and responsible for their own decisions and actions, but as a society we have failed in our duty to them and need to rectify this mistake while we can still make a difference. If you are part of this generation, have friends or children in this generation, please be sure and point them in the right direction of accurate and timely sexual health information, like this site provided by Planned Parenthood. Don't be embarrassed or feel it isn't your place. Not only is that kind of thinking what got this  generation into this situation, you can use your concerns as the jumping off point for the conversation. A person's sexual health may be a private issue, but it's impact can be felt throughout society as a whole, especially when an entire generation doesn't even know the risks they are facing.