Given Permission

Recently, I came across an article by a vehement conservative pro-life U.S. mother, who related her experience giving birth to two children under Canada's universal health care. She spoke about how she had initially opposed the idea on moral grounds, but when she was able to complete all of the pre-natal care, she found herself changed by the expectations of what a government should be to its people.

I started to feel differently about Universal government mandated and regulated Health care. I realized how many times my family had avoided hospital care because of our lack of coverage. When I mentioned to Canadians that I had been in a car accident as a teen and hadn’t gone into the hospital, they were shocked! Here, you always went to the hospital, just in case. And the back issue I had since the accident would have been helped by prescribed chiropractic care which would have been at no cost to me. When I asked for prayers for my little brother who had been burned in a camping accident, they were all puzzled why the story did not include immediately rushing him to the hospital. When they asked me to clarify and I explained that many people in the States are not insured and they try to put off medical care unless absolutely needed, they literally could not comprehend such a thing.

[Via Permission to Live, by A Young Moms Musings]

This is an important difference. Many GOP members have shaped it as a blight on your freedom to be forced to be healthy. Instead, this mother discovered that it gave her the freedom to have a child and get the necessary treatments without worrying about cost or debt. They're also able to do it much more efficiently. Unless you're part of the one percent, comprehensive health care is most likely out of reach.

Growing up in a family that had good health care provided by a parent's employer, I'm still shocked when people put off going to the dentist or the doctor. Health was important, and if you didn't prevent it now, you'd pay for it later. But, I was surprised to learn that my own policy covered chiropractic care, which would have been easier to obtain if I'd had all of the documents translated from legalese into English.

The scary thing for me was always the threat of losing health care. In the U.S., you might need to declare bankruptcy. In Canada, there's health care for you, regardless if you lose your job, have a baby, or get into an accident.

Making sure that all citizens have the ability to receive quality health care, regardless of their ability to pay, is a way to ensure that you're taking care of your entire population, not just the rich.

This is Why We Fight

Now, in the land of frightening news:

While the Florida legislature had allocated $1.5 million to 30 rape crisis centers in the state, Gov. Rick Scott used his line-item veto power to cut the funding. The Governor claimed the funding was “duplicative, since, as a state, we already fund sexual violence programs.” But Jennifer Dritt, the executive director of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence, said individual centers could lose between $30,000 and $100,000 each and don’t have enough funds to serve the 1.2 million women in Florida who “already have been victimized.” 

[Via Feministing.com]

I feel like a lot of people don't realize the magnitude of the problem of sexual assault. Statistically, 1 in 5 women will experience sexual assault at some point in their lives. At least, that's the reported amount. It's within your rights to choose not to report a crime, especially when the justice system is formulated to place the blame on the victim. Yet, these facilities should be available for people to get tested, etc...

I mean we can all agree that violence against women is bad right?  And we can all agree that survivors of domestic abuse need assistance, right?  So why are Republicans opposed to funding that assistance?   Hang ups in this current version of the bill is additional provisions supporting undocumented and LGBT survivors.

[ Via Feministing.com]

 Do we really want perpetrators to believe that it is okay to victimize, as long as the person is undocumented or LGBT? I find this sort of double standard to be very troubling. Undocumented workers in this country already struggle with little protection from the law. Is this the sort of provision that we want to enshrine, a permanent underclass? I should hope not.

Edit: Sadly, related:

 Scholars believe that abuse rates in the ultra-Orthodox world are roughly the same as those in the general population, but for generations, most ultra-Orthodox abuse victims kept silent, fearful of being stigmatized in a culture where the genders are strictly separated and discussion of sex is taboo. When a victim did come forward, it was generally to rabbis and rabbinical courts, which would sometimes investigate the allegations, pledge to monitor the accused, or order payment to a victim, but not refer the matter to the police.

[Via New York Times]

The article continues about the degrees of intimidation experienced by families who speak up about abuse, within the Orthodox Jewish culture. And while I know that the Orthodox Jewish experience is very different from the total Jewish experience, it's still troubling that abuse is not only swept under the rug, the social controls punish the victim.

The Cost and Care of Essential Femininity

This week, in response to a lot of commotion about women's rights over their reproduction, Jezebel posted an interesting run-down of costs of womanhood. As a counterpart to the men who complain about discounts for female drivers and ladies' nights affording women discounted drinks and club entry, the article noted exactly how much an average woman spends on her fertility.

 Given the national debate regarding birth control coverage, it's increasingly clear that many people have no idea how much it costs it to own a vagina — folks are getting up in arms about the idea that the pill could set uninsured women back about $1000 a year, but in the grand scheme of things, that's nothing. Do you even know just how much you're shelling out for your clam? Were you aware of the fact that in your 20s alone, you will spend over $26,000 on vaginal maintenance? Herewith, we do the math on just how much that cooter is costing you.

[Via Jezebel.com]
It all puts me in mind of the soul song, "A Woman's Worth." I remember getting the talk from mom, and wondering exactly what kind of a raw deal I was signed up for. Headaches and bleeding every month? Crazy hormones? Not even counting all the problems with pregnancy! No wonder it was described as a curse.

While I'm grateful to developments in the paper products industry for freeing us from The Red Tent and using washcloths to stem the tide, we haven't progressed much further from that. Women still have a lot of money to spend on their basic maintenance, excluding the fashion trends that make our clothes go out of style sooner, and the push for a 'serious business woman' to look like a fashion model. One friend was hired for her first real job, and told in the interview, that she needed to spend her first few paychecks on clothes. Not transportation, food, or rent. CLOTHES. 

The Atlantic also notes that women have additional costs, and Jezebel's list is by no means exhaustive:

While Morrissey doesn't note this specifically, such health visits could also include procedures like colposcopies and LEEPs, biopsies of various female parts, and so on—all of which, even if a woman is insured, add up with co-pays and costs beyond what insurance covers.

[Via The Atlantic Wire]

As a recipient of those extra procedures and tests, can I just point out how not having insurance is one of my biggest fears? In fact, after a visit to the doctor lead my common cold to cost as much with insurance as without it (thank you co-pays), the insurance debacle, err... debate is really the one that shapes my generation.

Find a lump, get hit by a bus, sneeze a little too hard, but without insurance you're essentially in a Third World Country. At least there, you'd have chickens to barter with. Maybe a goat if you needed surgery.

Europe is scratching its head over the possibility that the U.S. Supreme Court will strike down President Obama's signature legislative achievement. As the judiciary and the Obama administration trade legal barbs over the high court's authority, the idea that health care coverage, largely considered a universal right in Europe, could be deemed an affront to liberty is baffling.

 [Via The Atlantic Wire]

In a place where I didn't have to worry about filing bankruptcy for health care costs, I'd be more okay with spending a few extra dimes on work clothes. All of this makes me think that a nice Nordic country would be a wonderful place to bear and raise children. Health care, good education and decent holidays? Sign me up!