News
New bill to aid assault victims
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Pedro Oliveira Jr.:
- Board suggests hire of another 911 employee (February 25, 2009)
- Council raises bus fare to $2 (February 25, 2009)
- City sees increase in violent crimes (February 12, 2009)
- Gilman Street to be upgraded (February 5, 2009)
- Assembly Democrats place 'Wisconsin First' (January 27, 2009)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
Sexual assault victims would be eligible to receive information and access to emergency contraception treatment, according to legislation introduced Tuesday by state Senate Majority Leader Judy Robson, D-Beloit.
"This bill is about patient's rights, proper standards of medical care and how we treat crime victims in the state of Wisconsin," Robson said at a Capitol press conference, surrounded by supporters.
According to Meg Robertson, a nurse who specializes as a sexual assault examiner, sexual assault is physically and emotionally devastating, and most people are unaware of the available treatment options.
"Understandably, when a victim is initially seen in the emergency room, they do not know what questions to ask or what specific treatment options there are to prevent a pregnancy," Robertson said. "Every victim has a right to be told how to prevent a pregnancy after an assault."
Pro-Life Wisconsin, however, opposes the proposed legislation, calling emergency contraception an "abortion-causing drug."
"[We] sympathize with victims of sexual assault who desire to prevent a pregnancy, and we would support, for the women, treatments that truly prevent contraception," said Peggy Hamill, state director of Pro-Life Wisconsin. "However, it is extremely difficult to determine whether or not fertilization has occurred at the time emergency contraception is directed to be taken."
Hamill added, "We must always err on the side of protecting innocent human life."
During Robson's press conference, University of Wisconsin senior Amanda Harrington, a rape survivor, urged lawmakers to support the bill.
"Wisconsin medical providers must be required to inform a female survivor of sexual assault that emergency contraception exists, that she has the right to choose it as a component of her immediate treatment and to dispense it at her request," Harrington said.
Despite previous attempts to pass similar legislation, Robson spokesperson Josh Wescott said sponsors are confident the bill will reach Gov. Jim Doyle's desk since Democrats now hold the Senate majority.
Wescott said Robson is confident in the legislation because, "We also have a number of medical research and public opinion to support our point."
According to Mike Prentiss, a spokesperson for Senate Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, the lawmaker does not have an opinion on the legislation at this time.
In a recent poll by the Compassionate Care for Rape Victims Coalition, more than 80 percent of Wisconsin voters said they favored ensuring access to emergency contraception for rape victims.
Emergency contraception — also referred to as the "morning-after pill" — is a high dosage of birth control pills that prevents pregnancy if taken within 120 hours of an assault. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration allows people over 18 to purchase the drug over the counter.
According to data from the CCRV, over 300,000 women in the United States are sexually assaulted every year. As a result, more than 25,000 sexually assaulted women become pregnant and more than half of these pregnancies end in abortion.
The CCRV estimates about 88 percent of these pregnancies could be prevented if all women who were raped used emergency contraception.
Robson's bill is currently circulating the Legislature and seeking co-sponsorship before formally reaching the Senate.
11 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: 04ad0ee0
The quote attributed to Peggy Hamill doesn’t make sense: "…we would support, for the women, treatments that truly prevent contraception."
For this to make sense, “Contraception” should conception.
Also, the BH reporter seems to confuse conception again, in the following passage: “Emergency contraception — also referred to as the "morning-after pill" — is a high dosage of birth control pills that prevents pregnancy if taken within 120 hours of an assault.”
To prevent means to stop something from happening BEFORE it happens. If fertilization has already occurred, then a pregnancy would be aborted , not prevented.
IP hash: d1e55e52
Let me get this straight: Hamill is all about “healthy families,” yet supports forcing a teenage girl to keep a baby that resulted in a rape. It’s more important to protect the life of an embryo or an egg than that of a real human being with a future that will now be destroyed. So much for college. Then again, it’s every girl’s fault for getting raped, those little skanks all dress like they want it, right? Next, they’ll get accused of having premarital sex, and abstinence-only education will be hyped as a cure for assaults.
IP hash: bffde182
Anti-choice crazy liar! Go back to Peshtigo!
IP hash: 7eb72945
Also, the picture is of Lt. Governor Barbara Lawton who isn’t mentioned in the article. Way to go Badger Herald!
IP hash: b962f639
3:08 - EC prevents implantation in the uterous. Without implantation a pregnacy does not begin. Eggs are fertilized and fail to implant in many people, regardless of EC. It is not considered a miscarriage because no HCG is produced. So, yes, it prevents pregnacy - not aborts it.
IP hash: 9cc6c52a
About the 3:08am comment,
EC in fact prevents the fertilized egg from attaching to the wall, not allowing the baby to start its development.
Therefore the word “prevent” is not misused.
Peggy Hamill’s quote was in fact mistakenly transcripted, and we apologize for the error.
Pedro Oliveira Jr.
IP hash: 04ad0ee0
12:29PM - EC do indeed prevent implantation of a blastocyst, but certain ECs such as mifepristone may act as an abortifacient, if implantation has already occurred. There is plenty debate in medical journals on when a pregnancy begins ( day of last menstruation, ovulation, fertilization, implantation and chemical detection (hCG)). See Larimore, Walter L., MD, et al. “Response: Does Pregnancy Begin at Fertilization?” Family Medicine, November-December 2004.
I think the point of the OP is that the BH needs to take more care with definitions and terminology. Take the original quote again, “Emergency contraception — also referred to as the "morning-after pill" — is a high dosage of birth control pills that prevents pregnancy if taken within 120 hours of an assault.” This implies that EC is only used in cases involving assault. It is also used following instances of consensual copulation.
IP hash: 930c49eb
Mifepristone is not emergency contraception - emergency contraception (the kind referred to in this bill and every other general understanding) is a high dose of contraceptives. Either it is progesterin synthetic (levonorgestrel) or a combination of progestin and estrogen, just like OrthoCyclen or other hormonal birth control. (IUDs can also be used as emergency contraceptive devices but that is not part of the debate here.)
There is in fact NO evidence that hormonal birth control pills or EC in particular act to interfere with implantation. That was one theory for how hormonal contraception might work but there isn’t research to back up this idea. In fact, the most recent research (see Population Council, http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/popbriefs/pbmay05.pdf) shows that EC does NOT WORK by interfering with implantation. That’s one reason why it is so time-sensitive - it is most effective at preventing ovulation and no contragestive (stopping implantation) effect has been shown.
But in any case, there is no pregnancy until implantation; that point is not in dispute by any medical group. When a woman is already pregnant, taking progesterone (the exact same pharmaceuticals as in Plan B, the most common form of emergency contraception) will help PREVENT miscarriage. So taking it when pregnant cannot harm the pregnancy.
IP hash: 04ad0ee0
4:23PM—Thanks for added info. I would like to point out that although “pregnancy=implantation” is the current accepted interpretation by the American Medical Association and the British Medical Association, there are still a minority of medical groups that have differing interpretations. Historically, pregnancy was defined from conception until birth (i.e., the formation of the embryo).
The main reason for defining pregnancy at implantation is for ease of testing. There is an early pregnancy factor (EPF) that is detectable in a woman’s blood within 2 days of ovulation — if fertilization has occurred. The test for EPF is very $$$ and laborious. The hCG hormone shows up after implantation, and is much cheaper and easier to detect.
Mifepristone is indeed used an EC, when used in small doses (~10-mg), within 120 hours. It’s not licensed in the States as an EC, but other countries do use it as such.
Studies have shown the progestin-only EC has no known contraindications for an established pregnancy (implantation), but the combined progestin-estrogen EC may lead to blood clotting problems. (see http://www.aap.org/pressroom/ECstatement.pdf )
IP hash: c1e61228
That really is a great picture of the Lieutenant Governor — too bad she wasn’t quoted in the article, or even identified correctly in the caption. What a shame!
IP hash: 903c1d08
Yeah, check out the BH Alando Tucker article, which features Taylor in the photo.