The International House of Bacon

Perhaps the first in an ongoing series:

Things that are not happening: Health and Human Services are NOT redefining contraceptives as abortion, and they definitely are not redefining it based on polling data. That’s what’s being spun by the Huffington Post and by certain folks interviewed by The New York Times as evidenced here.

The document, which allegedly leaked and is linked above, is mostly about the long-standing problem regarding religious belief and medical practice, specifically the distribution of certain drugs by those who are religiously opposed to it. As there are various nondiscrimination statutes and work freedom issues involved, along with the various pooch-screwings that go on when you have the federal government giving money to private entities for health issues. The definition of what is abortion is entirely secondary, and acts only as a definition for the piece, which is standard practice. See this:

Abortion: An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. There are two commonly held views on the question of when a pregnancy begins. Some consider a pregnancy to begin at conception (that is, the fertilization of the egg by the sperm), while others consider it to begin with implantation (when the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus).17 A 2001 Zogby International American Values poll revealed that 49% of Americans believe that human life begins at conception.18 Presumably many who hold this belief think that any action that destroys human life after conception is the termination of a pregnancy, and so would be included in their definition of the term “abortion.”19 Those who believe pregnancy begins at implantation believe the term “abortion” only includes the destruction of a human being after it has implanted in the lining of the uterus.

That’s the part that has people up in arms. The following paragraph, however, should put people at ease:

Both definitions of pregnancy inform medical practice. Some medical authorities, like the American Medical Association and the British Medical Association, have defined the term “established pregnancy” as occurring after implantation.20 Other medical authorities present different definitions. Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, for example, defines pregnancy as “[t]he state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation.”21 Dorland’s Medical Dictionary defines pregnancy, in relevant part, as “the condition of having a developing embryo or fetus in the body, after union of an oocyte and spermatozoon.”

The concept that the definition is changing based on polling is false - does the document cite polling as a part of its research? Yes, but only to demonstrate that the popular definitions match up with commonly-used definitions in the field. Perhaps “inform medical practice” is a poor term to use, but it’s clear where they’re going with this.

As it only has to do with discrimination practices and the belief structures that often run afoul of those statutes in place, that’s all this does. There’s surely plenty of debate around whether pharmacists should be allowed to refuse to fill prescriptions that counter their beliefs, and this document will ultimately do nothing to quell that, but that’s what it’s about - this isn’t some end-around on contraceptives.

I strongly, STRONGLY encourage anyone who really cares about this issue to read the whole document - the whole thing is around 29 pages, the meat only the first 20-25 or so before it gets into the basic legalese required of any report. Assuming this report is genuine - and, being a draft, it will likely change considerably if it exists at all in reality - it’s not doing what the spin suggests.

I may not have time for a real link post for Thursday, as I got home late and decided to write this. If something pops up later on, you’ll figure out that I had time.