Pres. Bush and Women's Health Information

[shortstop]

:zoinks OH MY GOD. I don't even really know what to say.

President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to Head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed.
As a result, the Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new members.

This position does not require Congressional approval.

The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy,
contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.

Dr. Hager, the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing Women with case
studies from Hager's practice. His views of productive health care are far outside the mainstream for
reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing
OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome
should seek help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically
inaccurate assertion that the common birth Control
pill is an abortifacient.

We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health.

Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to
guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

What do you :fishy think?

[ribbon]

This is frightening :surprise :zoinks. I almost don't know what to say. This is a nightmare. My first thought was jesus christ :reallymad. My second thought was I HOPE people, women in particularly get out to vote and use their voices on November second, when it really counts by voting to tell dubya that this is unacceptable. Our bodies. Our choices. Bush is trying to circumvent the law and the constitution. The reason there are three branches of government is to prevent a president, legislature, or the justice sides from being too powerful.

[Joi]

While I'm not pro abortion, I would have to question why the president would want someone so anti abortion to be a head of an organization that effects all women both pro and not. It seems like someone who's a little more neutral might have been a better choice.
Just my opinion.

[macgirl]

I did a google for him and found some information about him. His experience is on the GYN side and his research interests are "Mastitis, Post-Operative Infections, Group B Strep Infections, Vaginitis".

Great, so he'll prescribe antibiotics like they're going out of style, but not prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. :reallymad

I also found a letter (http://www.aauw.org/about/newsroom/press_releases/nomination.cfm) opposing his nomination. It's signed by a huge list of respectable organizations.

It upsets me that so many people accept the fact that this is the way it should be. Whether or not you agree with abortion, how on earth does a guy who holds a part time teaching appointment (as described by one article) get off telling women when they can and cannot have children (based on prescribing contraceptives).

You can make a difference. Vote in November. :usa :usa

On a silly note, my husband said let's kick him in the balls, and then tell him he has to seek help from reading the bible and prayer. :muhaha :supergrin :muhaha I wonder where I left those steel tipped boots...

[jadedixon]

Macgirl - If you can't find those steel tipped boots, I have a couple of pairs of figure skates with nice big toe picks you could borrow :supergrin :muhaha :winky

But on a more serious note, people like this scare the crap out of me and make me seriously consider moving to Europe (as if I wasn't already seriously considering it if W steals another election).

And his belief that women suffering from PMS ought to read the bible and pray... Unless he's ever had the cramping, the inexplicable mood swings, the increase in depressed thoughts, then I don't think he has any business telling women what's going to help with their PMS. I hate men who think they know all about PMS and they've never even had it. :reallymad :reallymad

(But no offense to all the guys out there who aren't arrogant like this jerk and who don't act like they know all about PMS and are perfectly willing to be supporitve in whatever way they can be at that time of the month, they can be lifesavers! Thanks guys! :yay )

There's more I could go on about, especially with how this jerk perscribes contraceptives, but I'm afraid it might turn into a bit of a rant on abortion so I'll just stop it here...

~Jade

[MegaVictory]

I'm voting for Bush, "less of two evils," but I think this is a bit far. Separation of church and state (of religion and science)!!!

[shortstop]

This is the type of appointment that makes me fear it will be illegal for abortions and contraceptives. I know there are a lot of :fishy who think that me saying that is a bit far, but this is the type of appointment that could do that.
Seperation of church and state....why doens't this administration get that?
My body, if I want to take Ortho Tri Cyclen I CAN.
My body.
My body.
My body.

[macgirl]

jadedixon said: But on a more serious note, people like this scare the crap out of me and make me seriously consider moving to Europe (as if I wasn't already seriously considering it if W steals another election).
You're not the only one. I was born in the UK and have a European passport. If W gets back in, I am seriously tempted to move back.

I honestly don't understand why Americans don't realize that W and his "posse" have restricted their freedom, and that it only seems to be getting worse, all in the name of (so-called) "security".

No, thank you, I lived in a country where we were faced with terrorism all the time (that would be England, as the IRA has attacked it many times). There were not the type of restrictions that are in place in the USA.

[jadedixon]

I honestly don't understand why Americans don't realize that W and his "posse" have restricted their freedom, and that it only seems to be getting worse, all in the name of (so-called) "security".

I totally agree. And you know what really cracks me up, especially about airport security? They put in all these precautions, violate all these civil liberties, and people STILL manage to get weapons onto planes. :confused I might have slightly less of a problem with the increased security if it acutally did something, but it's not doing anything!!!


This is the type of appointment that makes me fear it will be illegal for abortions and contraceptives. I know there are a lot of :fishy who think that me saying that is a bit far, but this is the type of appointment that could do that.

I totally agree, and this scares the crap out of me because I'm financially and emotionally unable to support a kid now or anytime in the near future. But do keep in mind, he can't ban every contraceptive out there... Unless he bans calendars too (think calendar methods, figure out when you're ovulating and avoid having sex during those times... thermometers can also help determine this, I guess he'll have to ban those too). I mean I know this isn't as effective as other methods of birth control, and I'm not advocating banning all other methods. I'm just pointing out that there are other methods and I'm willing to bet that if everything else gets banned there will be plenty of organizations out there helping women learn to use these methods. No man is going to tell me that I have to have children :winky

But if I did happen to get pregnant because he managed to get contraceptives banned and wound up not being able to deliver naturally, he'd probably tell me that I wouldn't need an anesthetic if I had to have a c-section, just read the bible and pray... :sarcasm The more I think about it, the more this guy scares me... And speaking of that, hey macgirl, how do I get a UK passport? :winky :supergrin

~Jade

[MegaVictory]

[COLOR=purple]So, quick question. If he wins, and if I was unmarried, my current gyn could not give me contraceptives? If that is the case, (I am married, though), he SHOULD NOT allowed married people to get them, either, because married peopl

[macgirl]

MegaVictory said: [COLOR=purple]So, quick question. If he wins, and if I was unmarried, my current gyn could not give me contraceptives? If that is the case, (I am married, though), he SHOULD NOT allowed married people to get them, either, because married peopl
Currently, in his practice, he refuses to prescribe birth control to unmarried women.

What this means to his (potential) position in the administration is unknown. One can draw conclusions, however.

If you lived in KY and were not married and went to him for GYN care, he would not prescribe contraceptives to you.

[Shauna]

Ok, this is laughable:

In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome
should seek help from reading the bible and praying.

I suffered from horrible rages before my period for FIVE years; along with a multitude of other symptoms. It's safe to say the only thing that a bible might have been good for was a good murder weapon. The ONLY thing that ever helped was the pill.

This is nuts. At least Bush is doing this crap just before the election. People can still make a difference.

[IthinkIcan]

The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.

Hm, okay, I take it this is fact :sarcasm :muhaha The above quotes what this committees makes decisions about. Alright, that and a couple other things.

Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee.

This, however, immediately got under my skin. It was obvious (to me and probably most people) what was going to follow (if honest with ourselves). This type of language and thinking panders to the liberal, the “feminist,” (insert word here) and in such a way that it villainizes Dr. Hager, President Bush, and conservative Christians, particularly those who might want to be in politics. Separation of church and state was never meant to be what it is being twisted into. Originally, in fact, it was quite the opposite. It was put in effect to protect the freedom of religion and to make sure there was never a national religion, so to speak. People had the freedom to practice their religion and to bring it into any of their affairs.

They did go on to get to their true concern
We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's lives or to preserve and promote women's health.

Critical drug public policy and research must not be held hostage by antiabortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

The truth of the matter is, though they poke fun and express concern over things found in the quote below, underlined, their main concern seems to be easily summed as fearing having someone chairing this committee that they feel may be “held hostage by antiabortion politics,” which will affect critical drug public policy and research as well as possibly affect “contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.” (this refers back to the original statement at top, which is what the committee makes decisions about, in part)

[quote]Dr. Hager, the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing Women with case
studies from Hager's practice. His views of productive health care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth Control pill is an abortifacient.

From the sound of it, I don't want him in the position either, but I just want to address a couple of things. Contraception and abortion ARE matters of conviction. Does he prescribe them for need?

As for religiosity and PMS, does he ONLY suggest praying and reading the Bible, or was this just PART of the equation. I go to a Christian doc, and I know he tells me to pray and read the Bible for just about everything. If he wrote a book, this would be in there, yes, even for PMS, and he would even find it key, but it wouldn’t be the only answer. Obviously at least my doc is in medicine for a reason. I’m postulating that maybe this doc is too. Then again, he may be one of the quacks of the century :duck And how.

Does he believe birth control is an abortifacient or the MAP? I see it says the common BC pill. Which one? Certain ones are considered as such by many. Unpopular but true.

There is, however, much more to reproductive medicine than even what was presented here. The focus so often is held on one or two things where this topic is concerned.

If, however, the information presented is one hundred percent accurate, I have to wonder, what the hell is he thinking. It isn’t that he might not be be brilliant for all we know, but surely there would be someone better "qualified"!!!

I just know that some people would be unhappy the second they learned a pro-life person might be in such a position, period, and they would find that person unqualified and dangerous, period.

That kind of gets to me.

Hm, and I'm being honest here, and then it occurs to me

why should it?

:yay

Truly, out of fear I may not be allowed to have an opinion. I guess that's the beautiful thing about America. See you at the polls. Use your voice. Vote.

:love

[macgirl]

IthinkIcan said: Does he believe birth control is an abortifacient or the MAP? I see it says the common BC pill. Which one? Certain ones are considered as such by many. Unpopular but true.
If this was his only concern, then you would think he would not prescribe birth control at all - to married or unmarried women.

Several sources have cited him as not prescribing birth control to unmarried women. They don't draw the line at "birth control pills". This to me means that he also does not prescribe the diaphragm, which can not be considered an abortifacient.

[bellydancer]

If this was his only concern, then you would think he would not prescribe birth control at all - to married or unmarried women.

Right on, :stars macgirl! :stars


I need to trust my that my doctor will make the best decisions for my health based on what my body needs. Not make a judgment on whether or not I deserve birth control based on my marital status.

[shortstop]

I think Macgirl hit it on the head. Who in the hell cares about my marital status, if the pill can help my medical issues with my period, I want it.

And frankly, this hits close to home with me because I have had my fair share of issues at only twenty-three years old. While on the pill, I still got endometriosis which my doc told me would have been a LOT worse w/o it. (Considering that the pill is a form of treatment, typically the first, for endometriosis.) He would refuse to take me off the pill now due to other medical issues....when I was first prescribed the pill it had nothing to do with sex, my bf was three thousand miles away, it was all medical. So, me or any other unmarried woman would have to suffer through problems because of his religious/moral convictions?
Um, religious issues don't have a place in the medical community, and if for some reason they are in there....they do not have a place in the position of government regulation of medical issues.

ITIC, you are definately entitled to your opinion, I don't happen to think it took too much of a liberal "slant" wording to show what this man could do do us. And I do see it as a seperation of church and state because if he is going to be a government employee dictating medical policy there is NO room for his religious ideas.

[savagesoprano]

I agree with many of the things said, but this article seems like it was written by someone who is against this guy. I would actually read the book before I made any judgements. I don't doubt that that stuff about the Bible was in his book, but I do doubt it is as the article says. I don't believe that this means that all unmarried women in the US can't get contraceptives..just only him and the people under him...please correct me if I'm wrong. I am pro-life and I do believe that women should control their bodies by controlling their behavior, but it seems to me that someone should read the book and give the report.

[MegaVictory]

Where did you read that? I have been trying to get more info, and haven't found anything. And when I tell others about this, they say, where did you read this?

[SFishy]

This originally came from junk e-mail, or a chain-letter. It's also quite outdated.

link: Read more here

Take care of YOU

[MegaVictory]

So, is it a false chain letter, or was it actually about to happen, and with several groups opposing it, they kept it from happening, and now it is outdated? Sorry, but, sometimes when it comes to politics, the way things are put, I have to read over and over to grasp, because some things are purposely ambiguous (or I am naive and don't get them), to confuse voters.

[Freetobe-Me]

i just need to put in my two cents. I am going to reserve judgment on this particular Bush appointment since it originated in a chian email and I don't have other sources at the moment to check However, I want to point out that it is not far fetched to think that whoever is elected as the next president will have a tremendous impact on women's rights. The next president could potentially have the opportunity to appoint up to four Supreme Court Justices. What does this mean? If something such as Roe v. Wade makes it back to the court it could be overturned like that. Last time I checked only one vote was needed. Whatever your beliefs, this is something to seriously consider. I think that this issue is of tremendous import since the Supreme COurt has so much power and in some ways it is sort of getting swpet by the way side because of other issues in this election. The bottom line mkae sure your voice is heard in Nov. **** and vote.

:love

Tina

[shortstop]

I can definatley say I didn't know it was a chain email...the woman I used to work for gave it to me with a packet of other information. It was printed out along with the list of organizations and people that were building a petition against it. The woman that gave it to me is usually pretty reliable...sorry guys.

[Dandy]

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/hager.htm

I found this information at Snopes (a website that debunks urban legend/chain emails, etc). This indicates that perhaps the info is not as false or misleading as we might hope...

Just wanted to throw it out there, I'm not trying to debate Amy or anything. Either way, the info is still old, looks like this all went down in two thousand two.
Dandy