ACCESS: Making Choice A Reality
The Quarterly E-Newsletter of ACCESS
Dear Friend,
Our e-newsletter for Fall 2006 is finally here! As
we got closer and closer to November, we couldn't
help but wait to see what changes the election would
bring - and boy are we glad we did!! Read below for
more exciting news about reproductive rights issues,
life at ACCESS and our transitions.
IN THIS ISSUE...
- Save the Date for ACCESS Holiday Party!
- Breaking News: A Good Week for Abortion Rights
- Reproductive Rights Updates
- Staff Changes on the ACCESS Hotline
- Volunteer Voices: Three Interns Share Stories
- Real Women, Real Choices: Life on the Hotline
Save the Date for an ACCESS Party!
Tuesday, December 12th
Please save the date for Tuesday, December 12th,
when ACCESS will host our annual holiday party. This
year, however, we will be having a special event
rather than our regular open house at the office.
We hope you will join us to recognize Parker's 10
years of service with ACCESS, meet our new
Executive Director, and celebrate the organization's
accomplishments as well as its fabulous future! The
event will be somewhere BART-friendly in the Bay
Area. Details to follow very soon!
Breaking News Post-Election
A Good Week for Abortion Rights!
As you all probably know by now, this past Tuesday
voters around the United States sent a strong
message to our government, and among other things,
we stood up for reproductive rights and access to
abortion for ALL women!
Most exciting for ACCESS, California voters soundly
defeated Proposition 85 (54% to 46%), once again
saying NO to mandated parental notification for
abortion. Hopefully our opponents will get the
message this time - the people of California will not
tolerate attacks on access to abortion or allow the
health and rights of our teenagers to be endangered
for a political agenda! There were also several other
major victories for abortion rights this election. In
South Dakota, voters repealed the extreme abortion
ban passed earlier this year by their state legislature
by a margin of 56% to 44%. And in Oregon, voters
defeated a parental notification measure similar to
California's Prop 85.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday the Supreme Court heard
arguments challenging the Federal Abortion Ban,
which was passed by Congress and signed into law
by President Bush in 2003. The Ban has already been
found unconstitutional by six lower federal courts
because it does not offer a health exception and/or
because it is so vaguely worded as to potentially
apply to all second-trimester abortion procedures. A
decision is expected sometime before July 2007, and
insiders are cautiously optimistic that we will see
another 5 to 4 vote striking down this dangerous and
misguided law. More information can be found from
the Kaiser Family
Foundation.
Reproductive Rights Updates
News You Can Use
Prescription-Free Plan B for Women 18 and Over
Only
Three years after agreeing to review emergency
contraception for over-the-counter (OTC) sale, in
August the FDA approved Barr Laboratory's
application for the sale of Plan B to women 18 and
over without a prescription. This arbitrary age
restriction was included despite repeated findings by
the FDA's own scientific evaluation panels that Plan B
is safe for unrestricted over-the-counter sale to
women of all ages. Initially the FDA had indicated
that they would likely approve the application
allowing Plan B to be sold OTC for women over 16
years of age, but then chose to set the limit at 18
because it would be 'easier to remember.'
Practically speaking, enforcement of this age
restriction means that Plan B will actually be
available 'behind the counter' at pharmacies and
clinics (not out on the shelf with Tylenol or in your
local gas station convenience store, for example).
Buyers will have to show proof of age and women
under 18 will still need a prescription unless they live
in a state such as California that already allows
prescription-free access to EC. Only men over 18 will
be allowed to buy the drug, though they should not
be questioned about the age of the woman they are
purchasing it for.
Some questions also remain as to how OTC status will
affect the cost of obtaining Plan B. Barr
Pharmaceuticals has said that they expect costs for
the nonprescription version of Plan B, which typically
costs $25-40, to increase slightly. In addition, when
a drug becomes classified as over-the-counter,
insurance providers traditionally cease to cover it,
meaning that women will have to pay out of pocket in
most states. However, women will not have to pay
for a doctor's office visit in order to get a
prescription, which could reduce costs. It is unclear
whether Medicaid, which currently covers Plan B with
a co-payment, will continue to cover the drug for low-
income women once it is classified as over-the-
counter.
In California, emergency contraception has been
available from pharmacists without a prescription
since 2002, for women of all ages. As a result, the
FDA ruling will have less of a dramatic impact on the
reality of access to emergency contraception in
California than in other states. We have also been
assured by the Dept of Health Services that Plan B
will continue to be covered by Family PACT even
when it becomes truly available over-the-counter.
Although this is only a partial victory, it is certainly a
step in the right direction and a huge benefit to
millions of women living in states where EC has been
very difficult to obtain. Barr and the FDA predict that
Plan B should be available nationally at pharmacies
before the end of the year. Although Plan B is most
effective the sooner it is taken, it can be taken for
up to five days after unprotected sex. Any woman
including minors! can request an advance
prescription from her doctor or a family planning clinic
to have on hand in case of emergency. Or call
ACCESS or 1-888-NOT-2-LATE for more info on
where to find emergency contraception in your area!
Federally Funded Pregnancy Resource Centers
Incorrectly Inform About Abortion
An undercover survey of 25 federally funded
pregnancy resource centers (often referred to as
crisis pregnancy centers) released this past summer
confirmed what many reproductive rights advocates
have been saying for years. According to the study
released by Rep. Henry Waxman, investigators who
posed as 17-year-old teens seeking information about
their unintended pregnancies were frequently told
that "abortion leads to breast cancer, infertility, and
mental illness." According to the report, the
pregnancy centers gave out misleading information
about abortion 87% of the time (20 of the 23 centers
reached by telephone). Not surprisingly, the report
concluded that these federally funded centers "may
be effective in frightening pregnant teenagers and
women and discouraging abortions," and noted that
denying women accurate information and preventing
informed decision-making is a clear violation of
accepted public health practice.
It is disturbing enough that privately funded crisis
pregnancy centers continue to promote their anti-
abortion agenda by tricking vulnerable women into
believing that they offer information on 'all options'
when in fact they provide false, biased propaganda.
Worse yet, since 2001 our federal government has
provided more than $30 billion to such organizations
in at least 15 states (including funds for abstinence-
only education as well as capacity-building). The
Waxman Report is a step toward revealing the true
nature and scope of this problem. However, the
Department of Health and Human Services, which
received the report in mid-July, has not yet
commented on the findings of the Waxman report.
For more info or to download a copy of the report, click here.
NAPW Leads Opposition to C.R.A.C.K./Project
Prevention
Proposition 85 is not the only issue resurfacing this
year; C.R.A.C.K. (aka Project Prevention) is also back
in the news. The program, originally called Children
Require a Caring Kommunity, offers currently and
formerly drug-addicted women $300 cash to be
sterilized or go on a long-term birth control method.
C.R.A.C.K. was started by a woman named Barbara
Harris after she adopted several children born to a
woman addicted to crack cocaine.
Groups such as ACCESS and National Advocates for
Pregnant Women (NAPW) oppose C.R.A.C.K./Project
Prevention on the grounds that it is coercive,
bigoted, and in violation of basic informed consent
principles. The program also perpetuates
misinformation and stereotypes about pregnancy,
drug use, access to drug treatment and access to
contraception. Rather than fighting for affordable
drug and alcohol treatment programs, publicly funded
reproductive health services, and better support for
women and families, C.R.A.C.K. simply targets women
who are desperately addicted to drugs and offers
them cash in exchange for their fertility. This is one
of the most short-sighted and cynical approaches to
drug addiction imaginable.
C.R.A.C.K. also reveals its bias by focusing on a
relatively small number of women of color in poor
neighborhoods who are addicted to crack cocaine,
rather than campaigning to reach the many
thousands of women whose newborns suffer health
consequences from alcohol or cigarette exposure.
Why? Because those women are more likely to be
white, middle-income or otherwise have rights that
are harder to stomp on. Yet according to the National
Institute on Drug Abuse, women in the U.S. are 20
times more likely to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes
than to use cocaine during pregnancy. In fact,
current research suggests that many of the health
consequences previously blamed on cocaine use
during pregnancy may actually be due to cigarettes
and alcohol, since virtually all cocaine users also drink
and smoke.
In a recent article in the Journal of Law in Society,
Lynn Paltrow of NAPW wrote: "Under the guise of
openness, 'voluntary' choice, and personal
empowerment, C.R.A.C.K. not only promotes a vicious
image of the 'eternal drug addict,' it has won
significant support for a program and an ideology that
is at the core of civil rights violations and eugenic
population control efforts." For more information on
this and other issues affecting the rights of pregnant
women, visit
the NAPW web site.
Schwarzenegger Vetoes SB 840 and Universal
Health Coverage
Nearly 1 in 5 Californians (19%) are uninsured.
According to the Foundation for Taxpayer and
Consumer Rights, half of every dollar spent on health
care is wasted on administration, insurance company
profits, and overpriced pharmaceuticals. SB 840
(Kuehl), the California Health Insurance Reliability
Act, offered a comprehensive plan to save money
while providing health coverage for all Californians.
The bill was passed in both the State Assembly and
the State Senate, making it the first time in the
history of California that the legislature sent such a
comprehensive health care reform bill to the
governors desk.
Unfortunately, SB 840 was vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger, who erroneously said the bill would
create a 'government-run system of socialized
medicine' (a mistake that is not surprising given his
refusal to meet even once with Senator Kuehl to
discuss the actual bill). In reality, SB 840 proposed to
provide health insurance not health care to all
California residents through a single-payer program
run by a new organization, the California Health
Insurance Agency. The program would be funded by
current state healthcare funds as well as payments
from consumers and employers. Healthcare would be
provided by independent doctors, clinics and
hospitals that would remain privately or publicly run
just as they are now, and each individual would be
allowed to choose his or her own doctor without the
convoluted restrictions currently required by most
managed-care plans.
It is estimated that SB 840 would save the state,
businesses and working families nearly $8 billion just
in the first year. Fortunately, Senator Kuehl has until
2008 (when she will be forced out of office due to
term limits) to fight for universal health care for all
Californians so stay informed and involved and
maybe well win next year!!
Teen Endangerment Act Fails to Pass Senate -
This Time
Last month, the Senate narrowly averted disaster for
young women throughout the United States by
refusing to consider the "Child Interstate Abortion
Notification Act" (CIANA), more commonly known
among reproductive rights advocates as the Teen
Endangerment Act.
CIANA is comprised of two main parts. First, it
criminalizes any adult who assists a young woman in
crossing state lines to get an abortion without first
complying with any parental notification or consent
laws required by her home state. There is no
exception for relatives such an aunt or grandmother,
and the law would apply to groups like ACCESS and
other abortion funds that pay for bus tickets or
provide volunteer rides across state lines. In addition,
CIANA would create a federal parental notification
law by requiring that anytime a young woman seeking
an abortion is a resident of a state other than the
state where the abortion is performed, the physician
who performs the abortion must provide 24 hours
notice to a parent of the minor before performing the
abortion, regardless of the laws in her home state.
Since only 13 percent of counties in the U.S. have
any known abortion providers, women of all ages are
often forced to travel to another state to get an
abortion. The reality is that not all young women can
go to a parent when faced with this situation. Laws
like CIANA would simply prevent the most vulnerable
teens from turning to another trusted adult for help
and support leaving them with the frightening
option of going alone.
This bill is a threat that has been and will likely
continue to be with us for a while. As you may
remember, the House of Representatives originally
passed CIANA (HR 748) back in April 2005. In July of
this year, the Senate passed a similar law titled
the "Child Custody Protection Act" (CCPA S 403),
which did not include CIANAs provision requiring
mandatory parental notification for all out-of-state
minors regardless of the laws of their home states.
Because the bills were not identical, one of two
things had to happen in order for the bill to become
law during this session:1) A conference could be
called to resolve the differences between the two
versions; or 2) The House could opt to take up and
pass a bill identical to S.403, which would then be
sent to the President for his signature.
Unwilling to give up the more draconian aspects of
CIANA, Majority Leader Bill Frist made a formal
request to go to conference to resolve differences
between the Senate and House versions, but Senate
Democrats objected and refused to name conferees,
thereby blocking the conference. In a last ditch
effort to push the bill through before the Senate
recessed for the fall elections, a cloture motion was
filed to overcome the objection. When the cloture
vote finally came up at 10pm on a Friday night,
however, CIANA supporters fell three votes short of
the 60 votes required to end debate and force a vote
on the bill. As a result, the disparities between CCPA
and CIANA remain unresolved and the bill will not
become law, leaving the entire debate to resume
again next session. So stay tuned - especially now
that we have a new Congress!
Staff Changes on The ACCESS Hotline
Welcome Lupe Rodriguez!
This past June, after more than four years at
ACCESS, our wonderful Program Manager Alma Avila-
Pilchman decided it was time to move on in search of
her next adventure. Although we all miss Alma's
warmth and spirit very much, we know that she will
continue to do great work wherever she goes.
Fortunately, we found a wonderful new Hotline
Manager to keep moving ACCESS and our bilingual
hotline services forward! Guadalupe Rodriguez, who
goes by Lupe, has been with us for a few months
now and is busily answering hotline calls, coordinating
practical support, training interns, and doing outreach
in the community. (Lupe is pictured, center,
surrounded by interns Helen Ning, Andrea Jergesen,
Janet O'Connor, and Miriam Boxerman.)
Originally from Mexico City, Lupe was raised in San
Jose and recently returned to the Bay Area after
spending time abroad working for Salud Integral
Para la Mujer, an organization dedicated to
promoting and defending women's sexual and
reproductive rights in Mexico. She received her
Bachelor's degree in biology from Harvard University in
2005. When not studying, Lupe worked with various
community and non-profit organizations in Boston to
advocate for social resources for disadvantaged
families, promote equal access to health care, and
mentor children with special needs. Read more about
Lupe in her own words below!
"Just a year ago, I never thought I would be in the
wonderful place I am today. When I first started
college I was programmed to go straight through
school from undergrad to medical school and beyond.
I had no idea then that my life would change by the
spontaneous, unplanned choices I would make, which
were so uncharacteristic of me before.
Throughout college I worked at the amazing Boston
Medical Center with a student run advocacy and
social service program called Project HEALTH. While in
Project HEALTH, I not only learned about social
service systems, advocacy, and addressing the
causes behind the poor health and quality of life of
the underserved in Boston, but the rigid plans I had
for my life began to change. The thought of going
straight through school and becoming a doctor in a
neat few years wasnt as important to me anymore.
Nevertheless, because I really didnt know what else I
could do, I prepared to apply to medical school at the
end of my junior year. Then, my course completely
changed when a fellow Project HEALTH volunteer told
me about a women's health and rights organization in
Mexico called Salud Integral Para La Mujer
(SIPAM). Learning about SIPAM was the final push I
needed to break out of the safe path I had designed
for myself. So instead of medical school applications,
that summer I was filling out fellowship applications.
With a generous Harvard fellowship I soon set off to
Mexico to learn and 'do' great things. In retrospect,
my time in Mexico was one of the best experiences,
even though at the time I felt pretty useless. All I
was doing, I thought, was reading and writing about
people's misery and their declining quality of life. I
wasn't in action or changing what I saw as blatant
injustices. Still, I was so intrigued and inspired by the
work SIPAM was doing that I knew I wasnt ready to
go back to school just yet.
So when I came back to the US, I started looking for
the "perfect" job. It wasnt until July that I found the
listing for an open position as the Hotline Manager at
ACCESS. It was the only job that caught my
attention as something I would love to do and could
do really well with the experience I had. Even though
it was only a couple of days before the deadline to
apply, I was determined to get my foot in the door. I
scrambled once or twice, but I turned in the
application and fortuitously joined ACCESS as the
new Hotline Manager.
Now several months later, I'm living and breathing the
stories and lives of the women I work with here at
ACCESS everyday. I've only been here a short time,
but I think I already understand the depth and
importance of the work we do, and all women have to
do, to save and nurture our reproductive rights. I
only hope that my passion for the work can help
ACCESS grow, and more importantly, help change the
systems that create barriers for women in the first
place. I also look forward to getting to know all of
you who help ACCESS make choice a reality for
women!"
ACCESS Volunteer Voices
Three Interns Share Their Stories
Andrea Jergesen:
In reflecting on the time I've spent working as a
hotline intern at ACCESS, I have been surprised and
pleased to realize how much I have learned in these
few short months. When I started taking calls, it
quickly became clear that while a hotline service
provides for anonymity and thus a certain sense of
distance between caller and counselor, it also opens
a safe space that allows for a level of honesty and
openness that rarely exists between strangers. I
have been touched by the diversity of the stories,
emotions, and ways that the men and women I have
spoken with are processing their experiences. This
has confirmed for me that there will forever be
multiple approaches to addressing reproductive health
issues, and personal life challenges in general.
This has taught me that though there may be
moments during a call when I want to reach through
the phone and shake, or more often, hug and assure
the caller, it is not my place to do so. The job of a
hotline intern is to be a source of information and
education, a sounding board for emotions, a source
of validation, compassion, and support but not of
solutions or answers or fixes. That work the search
for correct actions, for balance and reconciliation is
that of the caller. Considering the diversity of
individual approaches to challenges, the caller is the
only one who will know what is right in her situation.
One of the greatest lessons I have learned this
summer is how important it is to provide not only
support, but also an appropriate amount of space, so
that an individual may best exercise her agency and
choice.
During the moments at ACCESS when I have not
been taking calls, I have been constantly inspired by
the work that the other interns and staff around me
are doing to protect such a sense of choice. Learning
firsthand about the cultural, societal, and institutional
barriers that stand in the way of women receiving the
care and empowerment they need and are entitled to
has made me angry and concerned. But when I come
to work every week, what I see in the office and
hear on the phone has given me so much hope that
all people, but women particularly, do have the
strength and power to make changes happen.
I am thankful for the opportunity I've had to work
with and by the women at ACCESS, and for the
encouragement that they have given me. I know that
what I have learned here will be of great service to
me as I pursue post-graduate studies to become a
women's health care practitioner, and also as I
continue to grow in general as a woman myself.
Miriam Boxerman:
As the summer
Reproductive Justice Advocacy Intern at ACCESS, a
major part of my job was to research policies
affecting access to reproductive health services, and
to help create materials for advocacy and community
education. Most of my time was focused on two
issues: Medi-Cal reimbursement for abortion and the
declining number of abortion providers that accept
Medi-Cal, and the new federal regulations under the
Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) that require citizens
applying for Medicaid to prove their citizenship with a
birth certificate or passport.
One of the more fun but also disturbing aspects of
my work involved surveying providers and agencies to
see what regular women would actually be told about
their options for obtaining services. These calls made
it all too clear that misinformation surrounding
abortion whether due to ignorance or malice
causes confusion and barriers for many women
seeking reproductive health services.
For example, when I called the Medi-Cal patient
hotline to ask a question about reimbursement rates
for abortion, I was told that Medi-Cal doesnt cover
abortion. When I said that this was erroneous
information, the customer service rep was
incredulous. "Really?" she replied. "Is that a new
policy?" Although new is a relative term, Medi-Cal has
covered abortions since the late 1980s.
Unfortunately, this is not a fact that many people
know apparently including Medi-Cal officials.
This exchange led me to play a plethora of what-if
questions in my head. What if I had been an enrollee
who wanted to know her right to abortion under Medi-
Cal? What if I had been interested in signing up for
Medi-Cal because I was pregnant and I wanted to
terminate the pregnancy? What if I didnt know to
call ACCESS where a hotline volunteer would dispel
the myth that Medi-Cal doesnt cover abortion?
After a summer at ACCESS, I have become acutely
aware of the reality of reproductive rights and access
to abortion in California. Sure, we discuss the
impediments to accessing quality health care in my
public health classes at UCLA, but this internship has
allowed me to see the difference between the
policies on paper that protect a womans right to
abortion and the barriers to actually receiving these
services. And I definitely plan to stay involved with
ACCESS when I return to the Bay Area next year!
Helen Ning:
I came into ACCESS as a person that didn't relate too
much to the community of her gender or have much
idea what women's reproductive rights were. Before
exposing myself to this small but wonderful group of
women who work hard to ensure all other women are
guaranteed a choice, I used to be an activist only in
international issues such as anti-war rallies or
immigrants' rights. I usually take a liberal stand on
social issues but just wasn't quite convinced on
abortion and reproductive rights due to lack of
knowledge and little affiliation with this issue. After
just a few weeks at ACCESS, however, I learned from
listening to stories of all types of women with limited
access to the choice they really want to make for
their bodies, and I realized how important the work
done at ACCESS is.
Using my skills as a trilingual woman (I speak
Mandarin, Spanish and English), my first project at
ACCESS was making phone calls to confirm the
language accessibility at abortion providers and other
clinics around California. Many places claimed to have
Spanish or Chinese language ability but failed the test
of being able to take a phone call from a woman who
did not speak English. The realization that many
places are not truly accessible to monolingual women
brought me to my next project, outreaching to the
Asian community service organizations in the Bay
Area.
As an Asian woman, I feel strongly related to the
underprivileged Asian populations that have been left
out of access to medical services that the
mainstream population enjoys, due to scarcity of
services in some neighborhoods and to language
barriers. In order to understand the issue better, I
talked to several wonderful organizations that are
currently doing their best to serve the Asian and
Pacific Islander community in the Bay Area. I received
lots of great advice from these organizations on how
ACCESS can work more closely with these
organizations and offer more complete services to
women of different backgrounds.
Despite the short time I spent at ACCESS over
summer, I truly appreciate what I have learned from
the people I met especially Parker, who gave me
this great opportunity and I will surely keep being
an activist in fight for reproductive choice and better
access for women of all kinds!
Real Women, Real Choices
Life on the ACCESS Hotlines
All names and other identifying information have
been changed to protect our callers'
confidentiality.
Lacy wanted to know if she could get
pregnant if she had unprotected sex while she was
on her period. I explained that the chances were low.
She has been pregnant before and she feels the
symptoms of pregnancy, she wanted places where
she could be tested. I gave her some referrals. She
asked if these places also do abortions and I
explained that they don't and that there are no
abortion providers in her county, she said that's
okay. I told her that if she finds out that she is
pregnant and needs an abortion referral, to call us
back so we can find something in a county that is
close to her.
Sara called ACCESS needing help paying for
abortion services. Uninsured, she was having a hard
time raising money to pay for the procedure herself,
and the longer it took her to raise money the higher
the cost of an abortion became as her pregnancy
went farther along. The clinics she called did not
offer payment plans, and no one mentioned anything
about Medi-Cal. When Sara called ACCESS she was
shocked to learn that she could apply for Medi-Cal
and it would cover her abortion. Janet, a hotline
volunteer, helped Sara figure out how to apply so she
could obtain her abortion without further delay or
frustration.
Kate didn't know she was pregnant until a
couple weeks ago. She had an appointment for an
abortion today but was told that she is 29-30 weeks
pregnant. This was a surprise to her, she thought
she'd be 3 months max. She's pretty shaken up. I
asked if she had a support system and she said
probably because she has to call and tell people since
she wasn't expecting this. She heard there were out
of state referrals that would still do an abortion. I
gave her the numbers but told her it wasn't certain
that they would see her and if they did it could be as
much as $10,000 with travel, hotel, etc. She said
that was ok. I told her to feel free to call us back
after she told people or if she just wanted to talk
about anything. I also asked if she had considered
adoption or keeping the baby and she said she was
set on abortion.
Rosemary was trying to find the abortion
clinic in Sacramento that Planned Parenthood had
referred her to she's 21 weeks pregnant and has
Emergency Medi-Cal. I told her that none of the
places in Sacramento take Medi-Cal past 20 weeks
anymore. She asked how much it would cost to pay
in cash, so I told her the bad news (at least
$1,500). I recommended San Francisco General
Hospital and she said she just got an appointment on
standby for Tuesday. I told her that's her best bet
other than raising money. She thanked me.
Miguel called saying that he was worried
that his girlfriend might be pregnant. They had sex
one week ago for the first time. It was 4 days after
his girlfriend ended her period, and Miguel used a
condom. In the days after having sex, his girlfriend
spoke with her pregnant cousin who mentioned that
she had felt sleepy and had some spotting at the
beginning of the first trimester. Miguel's girlfriend said
that in the past few days she has experienced those
same symptoms, and now she is convinced that she
is pregnant. I assured Miguel that sleepiness and
spotting are not sure signs of pregnancy. I asked
about his girlfriend's menstrual cycle, and he said
that it is very regular. I explained that over the
course of one 28-day cycle, there are only a limited
number of days in which a woman can actually get
pregnant, and that these days generally are in the
middle of the cycle. Because they had sex only 4
days after her period ended, and because he had
used protection, the chance that she was pregnant
is very low. I reminded him that the only way to know
for sure either way would be to do a pregnancy test,
and suggested he talk about that with his girlfriend.
He said he didnt know what he'd do if the test came
out positive he's just not ready for a child and his
dad would disapprove. I told him that ACCESS has
information about abortion, prenatal care, and
adoption, and that we could help him get insurance
without his dad finding out. I said we'd be happy to
help him explore those options in the future if need
be, but also suggested that he try to take one thing
at a time.
Heidi had already missed three abortion
appointments because she couldn't get a ride to the
nearest provider in Sacramento, which was over an
hour away from her home in Amador County.
Thankfully, when Heidi contacted the Public Health
Department she talked to a social worker who told
her about ACCESS and our Practical Support
Network. We helped Heidi buy a bus ticket so that
she could make it to Sacramento for her fourth
appointment. She was more than 17 weeks pregnant
when she was finally able to receive her abortion.
Elysha called looking for an abortion referral
in the Santa Cruz area. As she and Alma talked, it
became clear that the insurance Elysha was planning
on using to pay for the abortion was for people in the
military, which would not cover abortion (under the
Hyde Amendment, federal funds are banned from
paying for abortions). Elysha did not know this, and
had no other way to pay for the abortion. She was
relieved to learn about Emergency Medi-Cal, which
pays for abortion for low-income women who are
uninsured or whose insurance does not cover
abortion. At 10 weeks pregnant, however, Elysha had
just a week or two to get Medi-Cal and obtain her
abortion at the local clinic in Santa Cruz. If it took
too long and she went past 12 weeks she would have
to travel 1-2 hours away to get to another clinic.
Amanda called after she was turned away
from a clinic because they don't accept Medi-Cal for
abortions if the woman is over 20 weeks pregnant.
She had another appointment at a clinic a couple of
hours away and said she could find transportation
and money to pay for a hotel. Her boyfriend would
accompany her and care for her 2-year-old son, who
she needed to bring along. Amanda was still
concerned however, because she lives with her
mother and will have to come up with an excuse to
explain her 2-day absence. Tearfully, Amanda told me
that with her last pregnancy, her mother had been
extremely disapproving, and tried to force her to get
an abortion. On the way to the clinic, however,
Amanda realized how much she wanted to keep the
baby, and at the last minute refused to go through
with the procedure. When she found out about this
pregnancy, she had initially wanted to keep it as well.
As time went on though, Amanda decided that it
would be too difficult to make her mother angry and
cause additional stress in the family. When I asked
what she wanted for herself, she said, "even though
I want to, I just can't have this baby." Financially,
she explained, it would be impossible. I asked if she
had anyone else she could talk to, and she mentioned
her boyfriend. I encouraged her to call us back at
any time with questions, or just to talk about how
she was doing. She said she would.
Janey called from Placer County. She knew
there were no abortion providers in her area but was
having trouble finding anyone, even a few hours
away in Sacramento, who would accept her private
insurance. The one doctor covered by her insurance
couldn't see her for several weeks, which would put
her into the second trimester. As we talked, Janey
mentioned that she'd have to pay a $500 deductible
for the abortion. I offered her other clinics that could
see her sooner and would be as much as $200
cheaper if she just paid for the abortion herself
without using insurance. Janey was grateful for the
information but frustrated that her insurance was
basically useless in her situation.
|
phone:
510-923-0739
|
|
Mission: ACCESS exists to make reproductive
health and choice a concrete reality - not just a
theoretical right - for ALL women. Our programs
promote real reproductive options and access to
quality health care for low-income and uninsured
women, young women, women of color, immigrants
and women in rural or isolated areas. No other
California organization provides the same range of
support to women who are considering or seeking
abortions.
Board of Directors: Sepi Aghdaee, Nora Dye,
Zoe Harte, Reichi Lee, Jerrie Meadows, Christine
Powell, Shailushi Baxi Ritchie, Ellen Schwerin
Staff: J. Parker Dockray, Lupe Rodriguez
Interns: Lisa Banh, Francesca Barua, Miriam
Boxerman, Andrea Jergesen, Katherine Johnston, Ella
Milliken-Detro, Silivia Estrada Murillo, Helen Ning,
Janet OConnor, Adriana Quintero, Sophia Song, Nina
Spring, Pamela Stephens
|
|
|