Position Papers

members Toi Clawson and Lynn Lewandowski on Legislative Advocacy Day 2007
Legislative Advocacy Day, 2008

 

Statement opposing: Conscience Rescission Proposal (RIN 0991-AB49)

March 31, 2009
Office of Public Health and Science
Department of Health and Human Services
ATTN:  Rescission Proposal Comments
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW, Room 716G
Washington, DC 20201

RE: RIN 0991-AB49; Conscience Rescission Proposal:   STRENUOUS OBJECTION!

Dear Sir or Madame:
In response to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)’ request for comments regarding the RIN 0991-AB49 - Conscience Rescission Proposal, Feminists Choosing Life of New York (FCLNY) would like to make the Department of Health and Human Services aware of its most strenuous objection to rescinding the Conscience Regulation proposal of Dec. 19, 2008. 

History and Mission of FCLNY

FCLNY is a not-for-profit, secular, pro-life, pro-woman organization, incorporated in the State of New York, whose mission seeks to:

…open minds to its philosophy of pro-life feminism, the belief that all people, by virtue of their human dignity, have a right to live without violence from conception to natural death.”

As such, FCLNY has been fighting for the rights of women and their children, born and unborn, for the past twenty years, first as a chapter of Feminists for Life of America and now as an independent non-profit organization. We have advocated for minimum working wages in New York State, affordable childcare, medical oversight for emergency contraception, unborn victims of violence legislation and money for adult stem cell research and umbilical cord blood banking and research. FLCNY opposes abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia, war, and many other pro-life issues. Our web site is:  www.feministschoosinglife.org.

FCLNY Opposition to Rescinding Conscience Regulation

FCLNY is opposed to rescission of the Conscience Regulation for the following reasons:

1. Affront to US and International Basic Human Rights: Given our pro-life, pro-woman philosophy, and our active opposition to violations of human rights, we assert that to rescind the Dec. 19, 2008 conscience regulation (“Conscience Regulation”) which allows health care providers and others the freedom and basic human right to not violate their consciences, especially (but not limited to) abortion procedures, would be tantamount to stripping the human dignity of impacted individuals.

Women and men have an innate human dignity and corresponding human rights which are fundamental to human nature and which are recognized in the United States Constitution and by the 50 individual states. Further, basic human rights are recognized by the United Nations which has as the stated purpose of “promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction…” (United Nations Charter, Preamble, Purpose #3). Among these fundamental human rights is surely the most basic: the right of an individual to act in accord with her/his conscience, without interference from the government or employer.

2. Rescission Will Disproportionately Impact Women Health Care Workers: According to a 2003 report, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), found that women constitute 79.1 percent of all Health Care Workers. This female ‘supra majority’ cuts across all but one sub-area (craft workers) of health care worker classifications, and includes Professionals, Technicians, Operatives, Officials and Managers, and Service Workers.  All of these sub-categories of health care workers could have a potential moral conflict should the existing Conscience Objection be rescinded, forcing disproportionate numbers of women to leave their jobs. This could and will create an unjustly discriminatory financial strain on women. FCLNY cannot support an initiative which would so disproportionately impact women in a negative fashion.

3. Rescission Will Disproportionately Impact Health Care Services for Women and Poor: Those who support rescission of the Conscience Objection fail to understand that such an action will in fact harm women’s health!  Since it is generally religious-based health facilities which provide health services in poor and underserved populations where the private health sector is not financially motivated to go, it is likely that such providers will close or curtail services if they are made to perform services that they find morally objectionable.  Women and children who make up the majority of those living in poverty will be the most impacted.

4. No Evidence of Health Care Decline When Health Workers Decline to Participate in Conscience-violating actions: Organizations who would have the Conscience Regulation rescinded have failed to provide statistics which objectively show that health care access and services have been reduced since the Conscience Objection has been in place.

5. Precedent for Conscientious Objection: The right of an individual to conscientiously object to something that is contrary to his moral beliefs has been well-established in this country and throughout the world. In the United States, an individual’s right to conscientiously object to participation in war-related service pre-dates the U.S. Constitution (Section 6(j) of the Military Selective Service Act). Such allowances go back thousands of years in history (National Interreligious Service Board for Conscientious Objectors). On an international level, the issue of the human right to act upon one’s conscience was dealt with by the United National General Assembly in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which reads: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.” (United Nations’ Universal Declaration on Human Rights, emphasis added)

As such, there is overwhelming national and international support for the inherent right of an individual to follow her/his conscience by refusing to participate in an action which is contrary to the individual’s moral beliefs, even if it is generally a government-supported action, as it is in the case of war, and provision of abortion services.  
Additionally, it is inherent in this universally-recognized right of acting in accord with one’s conscience that one is assured of being able to do so without fear of retribution or reprisals. Rescission of the 2008 Conscience Regulation will remove that assurance.

Summary

In summary, the FCLNY strenuously objects to rescission of the 2008 Conscience Regulation.  It will undermine fundamental human rights, disproportionately impact women health care workers, decrease availability of care services in poor and underserved areas, and would go against thousands of years of governments recognizing the right of an individual to act upon his conscience without fear of retribution.

Sincerely,

Kelly Vincent-Brunacini, President
Feminists Choosing Life of New York
Wendy McVeigh, Executive Director
Jean Baric, Advisory Board

back to top

 

Statement opposing: Women’s Health and Privacy Protection Act (S5829)

Feminists Choosing Life of New York strongly opposes Governor Spitzer’s Women’s Health and Privacy Protection Act (5829) on the basis that it threatens the medical safety of women, disregards and disrespects the life of the fetus at all stages of development and leaves abortion as the ONLY choice for women experiencing an unplanned pregnancy.  Governor Spitzer’s bill is dangerous and blatantly promotes and supports legal but unsafe abortions for women. 

S5829 Threatens the safety of women

  • The abortion procedure would no longer require a licensed physician to be present.(S1201)
  • Makes prosecution for coerced, forced or so called “botched” abortions impossible due to removal of all abortion terminology.
  • No protection for women who unknowingly receive abortion medication from someone who does not want her to continue her pregnancy.
  • Prevents medical examiners from investigating deaths caused by suspected criminal abortion.
  • Abortions leading to a woman’s death cannot be tried as Manslaughter even if performed by an unauthorized provider.

S5829 Disregards and Disrespects the Life of the Fetus at all stages of Development

  • Seeks to override the Supreme Court ban on Partial Birth abortion by allowing termination up to the point of birth if a physician deems it necessary for the “health” of the woman.  This term, “health of the woman” is intentionally subjective and unspecific, thus can be used for virtually any minor medical or emotional difficulty.  The Supreme Court ruled that PBA is never medically necessary.

S5829 Leaves abortion as the ONLY choice for Women Experiencing Unplanned Pregnancy

  • Removes all possibility of enacting parental consent laws for minors seeking abortion.
  • Removes all possibility of enacting Unborn Victims of Violence legislation.
  • Bars state funds from being appropriated to abstinence or abortion-alternative education programs and forces public school sex education programs to encourage abortion and contraception over other alternatives

FCLNY believes this legislation has been proposed as a calculated political maneuver at the expense of all women and that the very title of the bill is designed to deceive. Don’t be fooled. Feminists Choosing Life urges you tovote “NO” to S5829

back to top

 

Statement supporting: Research using Adult Stem Cells, Amniotic Stem Cells and Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cells.

Feminists Choosing Life of New York supports state funding for research using adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells and umbilical cord blood research and banking.

  • Adult stem cell research has already led to treatments and therapies for Alzheimer’s disease, bone cancer, brain damage, leukemia, diabetes, eye degeneration, heart disease, immune system disorders, kidney/liver problems, MS, MD, Parkinson’s disease, spinal cord injuries and burn traumas. (Various sources, available upon request). No treatments are derived from embryonic stem cells.
  • Supporters of embryonic stem cell research are intentionally misleading the media and the public by minimalizing and distorting the successes in non-embryonic stem cell researches. These researchers and politician seek to secure funds for themselves and their districts with hopes of future licensing rights for created embryonic stem cell lines. (“Stem Cell Politics: Divide and Conquer”, by James P. Kelly, Director of Cures 1st Foundation. www.theseoultimes.com),
  • No licensing rights are possible through treatments using adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells or umbilical cord blood cells.
  • Adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells and umbilical cord blood cells are plentiful and their collection is safe, non-evasive and completely ethical. No exploitation of women or pre-born humans is required as in embryonic stem cell research.
  • Research involving adult stem cells, amniotic stem cells and umbilical cord blood cells does not represent a threat to the health and well-being of women.
  • 70 principal diseases and disorders are successfully being treated using cord blood stem cells. These diseases and disorders are listed in full on the National Donor Marrow Program website. (www.marrow.org and affiliated web pages),
  • Despite bans on cloning and embryonic stem cell harvesting, Pennsylvania and Minnesota are leaders in pharmaceutical and biotechnology employment.
  • In the recent discovery of amniotic fluid stem cells, researchers have found them to be easily cultured and genetically stable with capabilities of extensive self-renewal. Representing the stage of development between embryonic and adult stem cells, amniotic fluid stem cells “hold the potential for a variety of therapeutic applications” (Nature Biotechnology; 25, 100-106, Jan. 7, 2007).

Feminists Choosing Life of New York is a pro-life/pro-woman organization that seeks to open minds to its philosophy of pro-life feminism, the belief that all people, by virtue of their human dignity, have a right to live without violence from conception to natural death.

back to top

 

Statement in support of UNBORN VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE ACT

A.5777, sponsored by Michael Benjamin
S3117 by Serphin Maltese

Summary: This bill would amend New York’s conflicting status of penal codes 120 and 125, in relation to the unborn victims of violence act, to define a victim as any person born or unborn, at any stage of gestation. This bill protects and upholds all legal abortion rights in New York State.

  • 31 states currently provide full or partial protection for pregnant women and their unborn children who are victims of fatal violence. Anything less than complete protection beginning at conception is unacceptable.
  • According to The Washington Post, 1,367 pregnant and post-partum women were murdered between 1990-2004. (Actual numbers are assumed to be much higher as there is no systematic collection of pregnancy status on US death certificates or through FBI homicide investigations).
  • 1 out of 5 pregnant homicide victims are teenagers. (JAMA, 2001)
  • Black women are three times more likely than white women to be murdered during pregnancy (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).
  • Unborn victims of violence legislation will protect a woman’s choice to carry her child safely to term. New York State acts strongly to protect a woman’s right to legal abortion thus has an equal obligation to protect a woman’s right to carry her child to term. To deny a pregnant woman full protection, is to discriminate against her on the basis of that pregnancy.
  • Unborn victims of violence legislation will provide justice to families of pregnant homicide victims by allowing for additional charges against the perpetrator for the death of the unborn child (ren).
  • The murder of a pregnant woman is often a last act of domestic violence. This homicide should be considered, in most cases, a coerced abortion.

Feminists Choosing Life of New York, a statewide pro-life/pro-woman organization, strongly supports the passage of this legislation in New York. Currently, women in this state are stripped of their ability to seek justice on behalf of their unborn children while abusers and killers are protected from full prosecution. This bill is a long-overdue step towards correction of the inconsistency and inadequacy of New York State’s promotion of equal rights for women and protection of its children.

back to top

 

Statement of Protest against: Approved Health Budget laws A4308/S2108 and A4304/S2104 which enact the “Empire State Stem Cell Board and Trust Fund.

Feminists Choosing Life of New York opposes state funding of embryonic stem cell research and human cloning:

  • Embryonic stem cell research, with its limitless need for women’s eggs, is exploitative to women. The long term health effects of ovary hyper-stimulation drugs are largely uninvestigated but include: ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (6%), nausea, infection, blood clots, kidney failure, colon cancer, and other cancers. (Nature.com; August 2006).
  • Young women, women of color and women living in poverty are particularly susceptible to exploitation through the lure of financial gain through donation of their eggs.
  • According to the Family Research Council, there have been at least 25 deaths in the United States and 5 in the United Kingdom due to adverse reactions to ovary hyper-stimulation drugs.
  • There are no federal guidelines protecting women who donate their eggs. (New England Journal of Medicine; 3/29/07)
  • Embryonic stem cell research is unethical due to the necessary destruction of a human embryo in order to obtain the desired cells. To create a life through therapeutic cloning or somatic cell nuclear transfer, with the specific intent on its destruction, is unacceptable and ghastly.
  • Funding for embryonic stem cell research diverts valuable funding options away from adult stem cell research which already offers successful treatment for 70+ diseases. Additional treatments using adult stem cells, umbilical cord stem cells and amniotic fluid stem cells will soon be available. Treatments using embryonic stem cells is decades away.
  • Gov. Spitzer’s Health budget law leaves no leeway for outside oversight of activities regarding embryonic stem cell research. The allotted $600 million is exclusively under his control with much power given to his health commissioner.

Feminists Choosing Life of New York strongly protests the approval of public funding for the Empire State Stem Cell Board and Trust Fund and encourages lawmakers to consciously seek out ways to oversee and influence the trust fund and asks them to sponsor legislation for non-embryonic stem cell research.

back to top