Healthcare Prof:

Some federally funded pregnancy resource centers are incorrectly telling females that abortion results in an increased risk of infertility, breast cancer and psychological trauma, based on a minority congressional report requested by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and conducted by the Democratic staff of the House Government Reform Committee, the Washington Post reports (Kaufman, Washington Post, 7/18). For the report, released Monday, congressional aides posed as pregnant girls who were age 17 and requested information about unintended pregnancies from 25 pregnancy resource centers that have received federal funding inside the last five years, the AP/Forbes reports (Freking, AP/Forbes, 7/17). The report finds that 20 out of the 23 centers that could possibly be reached provided the aides with misleading or incorrect details concerning the possible risks of abortion. Based on the report, counselors at eight of the centers stated that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. Nonetheless, a 2003 National Cancer Institute panel concluded that abortion isn’t associated with an increased risk of developing breast cancer, the Post reports (Washington Post, 7/18). Investigators found that centers gave misleading or false information about abortion 87% with the time, CQ HealthBeat reports (Agnes Carey, CQ HealthBeat, 7/18). The incorrect data “may be effective in frightening pregnant teenagers and women and discouraging abortion,” the report said, adding, “[I]t denies the teenagers and women vital well being details, prevents them from making an informed choice, and isn’t an accepted public health practice.” Based on Molly Ford of Sterling, Va.-based Care Net, which supports pregnancy resource centers nationwide, you can find “many studies that show significant medical problems associated with abortion.” In accordance with Ford, the centers the report criticizes receive federal funds for abstinence-only programs but not for pregnancy counseling. “The funds are kept entirely separate,” she added (Washington Post, 7/18). In accordance with the AP/Forbes, a fraction of more than 4,000 pregnancy resource centers nationwide receive federal funding and most obtain funds for abstinence programs (AP/Forbes, 7/17). HHS spokesperson Christina Pearson said that officials in the department, which distributes funding to pregnancy resource centers, still are reviewing the Waxman report and have no comment on its findings (CQ HealthBeat, 7/18).

“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You’ll be able to view the entire Kaiser Daily Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service with the Henry J. Kaiser Household Foundation . ? 2005 Advisory Board Firm and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

Several South Dakota physicians have “lined up on opposite sides” of the state’s law (HB 1215) that bans abortion except to save a woman’s life and are “lending their personal and medical opinions to a cause in which they believe,” the Sioux Falls Argus Leader reports. In accordance with Ken Aspaas, president of the South Dakota State Medical Association, the abortion ban debate has divided the state’s medical community. Publicly, the association “has taken a largely hands-off approach towards the subject of abortion,” soon after “heated” discussions amongst its members in recent months, based on the Argus Leader. However, the SDSMA in June released a statement “strongly condemn[ing]” interference by the government or any person in a medical decision, in accordance with the Argus Leader. Some physicians are worried about the ban’s effect, “especially when they deem the procedure to be medically necessary for the well being with the pregnant woman,” the Argus Leader reports. Supporters of the ban have pointed to a report released last year by the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, which included testimony from physicians that ladies could experience potentially harmful emotional and mental problems from undergoing the procedure, based on the Argus Leader. The task force was appointed by Gov. Mike Rounds (R) and was co-chaired by Maria Bell — a Sioux Falls ob-gyn who also could be the co-chair with the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, the group that organized the petition drive that brought the abortion ban onto the state ballot (Myers, Sioux Falls Argus Leader, 7/16).

“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the whole Kaiser Daily Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Wellness Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a totally free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Loved ones Foundation . ? 2005 Advisory Board Firm and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.

Healthcare Prof:

4 (1 votes)

This alert highlights the investigation published this week in a special problem of Prenatal Diagnosis entitled, Fetal Sexing: Global Perspectives on Practices, Ethics and Policy. The special concern arose out of a workshop organized as portion with the SAFE network of excellence.

Reviews highlighted in this newsalert:

* Early pregnancy maternal blood test for fetal gender demands rapid ethical policy-making. The sex of a 5-7 week embryo can be determined by a brand new test – about two months earlier than was possible with ultrasound. But must we use this new technology ‘just because it is there?’

* Sex selection ” liberally ok but not without problems. Sex selection fits with a liberal view of permission in reproduction, but using abortion as portion of the procedure is less defensible and could degrade our value of human life.

* Will easier access to more effective sex selection affect gender balance? Probably not. Increasing ease of travel to countries with lax rules on sex selection makes it possible for wealthy couples to have a baby with the desired sex. But surveys that ask regardless of whether people would prefer to have a boy or a girl show that, at least in Western countries, the sex-ratio is unlikely to change considerably.

* Most people don’t favour sex selection. Surveys conducted to date show that, overall, people have negative attitudes towards sex selection for non-medical factors, particular if the method involves terminating a pregnancy.

Lyn Chitty, Senior Lecturer in Clinical Genetics and Fetal Medicine in the UCL Institute of Child Health, London, says, “this Special Topic problem presents a range of papers that talk about the scientific, social and political implications of fetal sex selection. It begins by describing the technological advances that have made early non-invasive fetal sex determination a practical, reliable and safe option for women at high risk of sex-linked disorders if the test is performed in accredited and experienced laboratories.

It then goes on to explore the views of clinicians, scientists and social scientists as well as the evidence from the developed and developing world on the possible impact of this technology if used for non-medical reasons.

It gives no answers and, to quote the editors of this concern – ‘It remains to be seen whether the triumph of modern science to allow fetal sexing at increasingly early stages of gestation will be seen as a triumph, allowing those at risk for sex-linked disorders to learn of the health of their fetus in the earliest point possible, or a tyranny, making simpler the selective termination of female fetuses with its attendant social and political consequences.’”

Early pregnancy maternal blood test for fetal gender demands rapid ethical policy-making

The sex of a 5-7 week embryo can be determined by a brand new test – about two months earlier than was possible with ultrasound. “It is imperative that an authorized committee of experts in each country generates and official policy regarding use of this test,” says Dr. Esther Guetta from the Danek Gertner Institute of Human Genetics, in Israel, writing within the latest edition of Prenatal Diagnosis.

To understand the test you need to know two things:

1. Fragments of DNA from an embryo can be found circulating in its mother’s blood.

two. Even though males have an X and a Y chromosome, females only have two X chromosomes.

If you take a sample of a pregnant woman’s blood plasma and find DNA that is only present in males, the woman is most probably carrying a male fetus.

Unlike other highly accurate invasive tests, this test poses no risk towards the embryo. It can also be carried out early in pregnancy. Add these together and it is likely therefore to become popular with anyone who is prepared to use abortion as a way of choosing their child’s sex.

“We need to think about this quickly due to the fact the technology is already with us,” says Guetta. Inside the USA, for example, some mail order merchandise already use this sort of technology.

“Should this new technology be applied ‘just because it is there’?” asks Guetta.

Review Title: Guetta, E: Noninvasive detection of fetal sex: The laboratory diagnostician’s view: Prenatal Diagnosis DOI: 10.1002/pd.1478

Sex selection – liberally ok, but not without problems

Sex selection fits with a liberal view of permission in reproduction, but using abortion as component with the method is much less defensible and is liable to degrade the value of human life. This will be the conclusion of Thomas Baldwin who works inside the Department of Philosophy in the University of York, England.

While there is reasonable acceptance of sex selection to help parents avoid passing on a genetic disease to their children, many surveys show that people don’t welcome the possibility of sex selection merely to choose the sex of a child.

In order to understand the opposition to sex selection, Baldwin considers the arguments against sex selection in 4 key areas:

1. religion – Baldwin believes that religious arguments by themselves must not be used to drive public policy in a liberal secular state, but suggests that the main religiously-derived arguments are taken into account in secular ethical debates.

two. social consequences – some people argue that a serious objection to sex selection is that it will lead to a substantial imbalance of boys over girls inside society. Baldwin, however, argues that if sex selection is primarily used for loved ones balancing, the numbers of boys and girls in Western societies will not become unbalanced.

3. child’s autonomy – it is argued that deciding a child’s sex violates his or her autonomy by imposing a particular destiny on the child. Baldwin rejects this view largely by pointing out that there are a lot of ways during our upbringing in which parents influence who we become. Sex selection is therefore not introducing something radically new, despite the fact that it does extend parental influence into a brand new dimension.

4. children as a commodity – still others argue that sex selection turns the child into a commodity that has been designed to satisfy a need and thus that parents will not give their child the unconditioned love it needs. But the connections here are not inevitable, and it might equally be argued that enabling parents to have the kind of child they want increases the chances of them giving their child the love it needs.

Since these objections are not decisive, Baldwin concludes that the liberal argument for permitting sex selection may be the reasonable position to take, though its use should be restricted for the moment to family members balancing situations. When it comes to looking at methods of sex selection, Baldwin believes that there is nothing problematic in any method that doesn’t destroy an embryo or fetus.

Once an embryo has been implanted and allowed to develop, however, termination of the pregnancy merely for the purpose of sex selection is in principle wrong. But he accepts that the combination of new non-invasive methods of testing with over the counter hormone abortion kits will make sex selection by early abortion something that is in practice impossible to stop.

“Since you will find no straightforward victims, it is a mistake to try and enforce its prevention,” says Baldwin. “We will just have to learn to live with all the resulting degradation of the value of human life.”

Review Title: Baldwin, T: Understanding the opposition: Prenatal Diagnosis, DOI: 10.1002/pd.1473

Will easier access to more effective sex selection affect gender balance? Probably not ..

Increasing ease of travel to countries with lax rules on sex selection makes it possible for wealthy couples to have a baby with the desired sex. But surveys that ask no matter whether people would prefer to have a boy or a girl show that, at least in Western countries, the sex-ratio is unlikely to alter considerably.

The desire to choose the sex of our offspring is not new – it has been portion of human culture for millennia. However until recently there has been no successful method of achieving this goal.

Now that methods, like sperm selection and non-invasive methods of testing an embryo’s sex, are becoming available, the concern is moving from 1 of mild interest, to one that requirements serious consideration.

“It will be very challenging for governments to stop people who want to use these new techniques,” says Frank van Balen who works at the Faculty of Social and Behavioural Science in the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The question then is whether or not this use will alter the gender balance within the population.

Many initial comments suggest that these tools will develop a population with more boys than girls, but van Balen thinks this is just not necessarily the case.

While ‘son preference’ tends to be stronger that ‘daughter preference’, recent surveys show increased ‘daughter preference’ particularly among women. Given that abortion laws give the woman the decision-making power over a termination, the argument that sex selection should be barred simply because it would discriminate against girls could not be so strong.

‘Light’ sex selection methods, especially those known not to be effective, enjoy a high degree of social acceptance. But it will also be interesting to see how attitudes change as people get used towards the presence of technologies that ‘work’.

Review Title: Van Balen, F: Attitudes towards sex selection in the Western world: Prenatal Diagnosis, DOI: 10.1002/pd.1471

Most people don’t favour sex selection

Surveys conducted to date show that, overall, people have negative attitudes towards sex selection for non-medical factors, particular if the method involves terminating a pregnancy. This was the main conclusion of a review that drew together data from 21 separate studies. The research was carried out by Dr Sue Hall and colleagues working in the Department of Psychology at Guy’s College London.

“Some with the studies show that whilst people may be in favour of the general principle of reproductive selection, they feel that they wouldn’t use sex selection themselves,” says Hall.

The surveys cover a range of time from 1971 to 2005. Sixteen had been carried out inside the USA, 4 in Germany and 1 in the UK. Attitudes were particularly negative in Germany.

“People’s attitudes become more negative when the methods used to select the gender of a child are explained – eg the cost and effort involved, the unreliability of sperm sorting or the need for termination of pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis,” says Hall. “People are particularly reluctant to endorse prenatal diagnosis and abortion for sex selection.”

Earlier this month MP Caroline Flint declared that choosing the sex of a baby for social factors would be banned and the Department of Health has been conducting a review with the 1990 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act – the legislation governing human fertilisation.

“Such debates need to think about the way that policy, guidelines and legal frameworks drawn up to function with Western attitudes and cultures will impact regions of the world that have more positive attitudes toward sex selection such as India and China,” says Hall.

Review Title: Hall, S: Attitudes towards sex selection for non-medical reasons: a evaluation, DOI: 10.1002/pd.1472

###

Notes to Editors

1. Special Problem: Prenatal Diagnosis: Fetal sexing: global perspectives on practices, ethics and policy.

two. Prenatal Diagnosis: The aim of the journal is to communicate the outcomes of original study in a variety of clinical and scientific specialities concerned with in utero diagnosis of fetal abnormality in humans (and in animal models) resulting from genetic and environmental factors. Prenatal Diagnosis can be accessed online at: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-07/www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/pd

3. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., with its headquarters in Chichester, England, is the largest subsidiary of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., provides must-have content and services to buyers worldwide. Its core businesses include scientific, technical, and medical journals, encyclopaedias, books, and online products and services; professional and consumer books and subscription services; and educational materials for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Wiley has publishing, marketing, and distribution centres inside the United States, Canada, Europe, Asia, and Australia. The business is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbols JWa and JWb. Wiley’s Internet site can be accessed at http://www.wiley.com/

4. The Special Non-Invasive Advances in Fetal and Neonatal Evaluation Network (SAFE) is a Network of Excellence established under the European Commission Sixth Framework Programme which aims to implement routine non-invasive prenatal diagnosis and cost effective neonatal screening through the creation of long-term partnerships.

The SAFE network will develop a series of measures to enable the rapid introduction of Non-Invasive Prenatal Diagnosis (NIPD) and Neonatal Screening (NS) throughout the EU and beyond. At present NIPD , based on a pioneering observation that circulatory cell totally free fetal DNA is present in maternal plasma and serum, has already begun to impact clinical practice. It started on 1 March 2004, will run for 5 years and has 53 partners from 19 countries currently participating. 1 with the reasons for the setting up the network is that relevant knowledge is dispersed across many disciplines, including molecular biology, medical genetics, bioinformatics, social justice, and ethical studies. SAFE brings together leading experts from the key disciplines in a programme designed to achieve intellectual and practical integration with a view to enhance the efficacy of NIPD and NS for genetic disorders inside and beyond the European Community. For more information please visit: http://www.safenoe.org/

Contact: Polly Young
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Healthcare Prof:

5 (1 votes)

U.S. District Judge Dean Whipple on Tuesday ruled that the state must supply transportation to clinics for pregnant inmates who wish to have abortions, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports (Mannies, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/19). The Missouri Department of Corrections in July 2005 adopted a policy barring the use of tax dollars to transport prisoners to undergo abortions. Attorneys for a state prison inmate — identified as “Jane Roe” in court papers — filed a lawsuit in October 2005 asking a federal court to order the corrections department to transport the woman to a clinic for an abortion. Whipple agreed to the request. Attorneys for the Missouri Office with the Attorney General unsuccessfully appealed the ruling to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals along with the U.S. Supreme Court. The woman was about 17 weeks’ pregnant and had been seeking an abortion for about seven weeks before she received 1 (Kaiser Every day Women’s Health Policy Report, 10/25/05). The American Civil Liberties Union filed for a federal ruling to make the Jane Roe decision applicable to all pregnant women inside the state, which Whipple agreed to, the AP/Houston Chronicle reports (Salter, AP/Houston Chronicle, 7/18).

Ruling, Reaction
According to the Kansas City Star, state officials cited security risks when setting the policy barring state-funded transport, but Whipple wrote in his ruling, “In this case, the undisputed evidence shows that inmates who chose to terminate a pregnancy and ought to be transported outside of prison for that purpose pose no higher security risk than any other inmate that calls for outside medical attention.” The state also had argued that paying for transport violated a Missouri law that says the state cannot assist in abortions. Whipple noted an 8th Circuit Court ruling in a previous case that stated, “We cannot accept the conclusion that ‘assisting’ an abortion encompasses driving or escorting the patient to the location where the procedure is to take place.” A spokesperson for state Attorney General Jay Nixon (R) stated officials were examining the ruling and don’t know if they will appeal it (Rizzo, Kansas City Star, 7/19). Gov. Matt Blunt (R) in a statement said, “This ruling violates our traditional Missouri values and is an affront to everyone that values the sanctity of human life. I urge the attorney general to fight this ruling that prevents the state of Missouri from protecting innocent human life.” ACLU attorney Tom Blumenthal stated, “This ruling reaffirms that the state’s effort to curtail a woman’s constitutional rights are futile and they’re wasting time and money when they attempt to do so” (St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 7/19).

“Reprinted with permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Everyday Well being Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for e-mail delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Everyday Well being Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a cost-free service of the Henry J. Kaiser Loved ones Foundation . ? 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Household Foundation. All rights reserved.