Friday, January 07, 2005

It was Bound to Happen Sooner or Later

You know, I don’t know what to say about most of this. My opinions are obvious and I don’t want this blog to become a forum for my hostility. That wouldn’t be fun. Thing is, I can’t let it go without writing about it either. After all, I warned you in my first post that this was a possibility. So here I go.

The DOJ is moralizing through their obvious and egregious exclusion of RU 486 in the guidelines for treatment of rape survivors. Make no doubt about it. These bastards are playing on the moral grounds that a lie of omission is no lie at all. At a time when a woman is most in need of information, the discussion that may help her most of all is withheld. This omission isn’t of the just “slipped by” variety. No, it was left out in the vain of someone that “simply refrains” from giving information that would reveal something they’ve done that is knowingly wrong to someone that is onto them. No flat out, “I didn’t do it”, but rather a “I’m not sure what you’re talking about”…that way they can later say, when they are proven wrong-doers “Well, I never lied.” Did too, bastard. And the DOJ can just say, “We aren’t making moralistic judgments, we just didn’t include the controversial pill in our guidelines.” F off. If I’m not informed of the possibility of pregnancy and the accessibility of RU 486, I am being lied to about my health and welfare, about my options and rights. Lying stinking bastards.


Blogger mister williams said...

You're right. There's little difference between providing false or misleading information and omitting information that could help others. It's amazing they can go to sleep at night. Or even get out of bed. Tragic. Simply Tragic.

11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Small point: EC is not RU 486. I think what is scariest about this is the comment by the lawyer that a woman has the right to defend herself, but not the right to kill a baby. How is trying to prevent a pregnancy not count as defense? EC is not a dangerous drug as was quoted; it is far, far safer than the Pill, and the worst thing that can happen is you throw up, rendering the treatment useless. Another concern I have is professionals saying it is only effective for 72 hours. The most recent studies and prescribing guidelines call for it to be administered up to 5 days afterwards. Studies being done now are testing at 7 days. To be sure, the sooner you take it the better, but efficacy does not drop below useful levels at hour 73. For rape victims they should be given it weeks afterwards if they want, because as the article was nice enough to point out the risk of pregnancy is low but the concern is high. You cannot address a survivor's concern with pregnancy with a pregnancy test 2 hours after the fact because it's meaningless (unless she was pregnant before, hi more trauma).
To be honest, I would never suggest that a woman without severe trauma (of the physical variety) go to an ER in the first place. As a culture we treat survivors of rape and abuse terribly; in an ER they are considered non-emergent cases (rightly so) and so are low on the list of priorities, informed and compassionate counseling is often not offered, staff is often not given any training on how to handle such cases, rape kits (that is, rape kits that will be admissable in a court of law) are not available at every hospital, and now they will not even be offered the option of EC. This is an egregious affront to the dignity of every woman in this country, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves. (deep breath) Now if you'll excuse me I'm going to go break into Planned Parenthood and start stockpiling Plan B.

1:52 PM  
Blogger Aerenchyma said...


Thanks so much for the clarification on EC. Do you have a source that I may look at to get more information on EC, per chance?

6:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home