The following summarizes selected women's health-related blog entries.

"Recession Cuts: Babies and Birth Control," Tracy Clark-Flory, Salon's Broadsheet: A recent Guttmacher Institute study's finding that many women have altered their childbearing plans because of the economic recession is "rather intuitive, but what this actually means for pregnancy prevention is less straightforward," Clark-Flory writes. Although 29% of women said they are more likely to use contraception every time they have sex, the "flip side" is that 8% of women "are using birth control less regularly as a means of saving money and, among women in financial decline, that number rises to 12%," Clark-Flory reports. The study found that 23% of women "are having a tougher time than a year ago covering the cost of birth control," a number that is "higher among women whose finances have dwindled," she says. She continues, "The upshot: Those who are least capable of affording the cost of a child are putting themselves at the greatest risk for an unplanned pregnancy. Women also report avoiding appointments with their gynecologists in the last year -- especially those who have recently lost their health insurance." Clark-Flory writes that the study affirms first lady Michelle Obama's recent statement that health reform is a "women's issue" (Clark-Flory, "Broadsheet," Salon, 9/23).

"To Have A Child or Not? Sometimes It's All About the Economy, Finds Guttmacher Institute," Amie Newman, RH Reality Check: The recent Guttmacher Institute study on how the recession is affecting women's childbearing decisions proves that "[f]inances have a very real impact on women's reproductive health decisions," Newman writes. "It's been a long fight to ensure insurance coverage for contraception and family planning services for women," she adds, noting that both pregnancy and caesarean sections can be considered pre-existing conditions and result in insurance coverage denials. In addition, "most individual health insurance markets don't cover maternity care services either," she adds. "And despite clear evidence to the contrary, many legislators refuse to acknowledge by helping women to pay for their contraception and family planning care, we save tax payers' money and, of course, help women and their families," according to Newman. She continues, "We are at a crossroads as we continue to fight for health care reform, specifically as it relates to a public option, making coverage more equitable and affordable for those who most need it." Newman says, "Since coverage of and access to contraception and family planning services and overall reproductive health care for women is such a contentious topic in this country, we need to look at reports such as this and note the ways in which we can change the system so that women's childbearing and family planning decisions are not so utterly dependent upon economics" (Newman, RH Reality Check, 9/23).

"The Republican Approach to Abortion and Health Care -- Fair or Unfair?" Steven Waldman, Beliefnet: In the Senate Finance Committee's draft health reform bill, committee Chair Max Baucus (D-Mont.) "rejected the pure pro-choice position -- he limited direct government funding for abortion -- but still included provisions that pro-lifers viewed as supporting abortion," Waldman, editor-in-chief and co-founder of Beliefnet, writes. Committee members Sens. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) have since "offered several amendments to move the health care bill in a more pro-life direction," Waldman states. He offers an analysis of the Enzi and Hatch amendment that he says is "not from the perspective of whether this is morally good or bad but whether it basically accepts the status quo approach to abortion, which prohibits direct federal funding for abortion but allows some indirect support." According to Waldman, an amendment both senators offered stating that "[g]overnment tax subsidies could not help people buy insurance that covers abortion" is "consistent to the pro-life position and to the status quo." Under Hatch's second amendment, "[i]nsurers could (as they can now) offer consumers the ability to purchase, with their own money, insurance supplementals that do cover abortion," Waldman writes. This is a "different approach" from Democrats, who have ensured that no tax dollars would fund abortion by segregating money for abortion coverage into separate accounts. "In my opinion, the Republican approach is simpler and cleaner (I actually advocated for something like this a few weeks back)," Waldman says, though he concedes that "it may be unrealistic to expect that women will be thinking about the prospect of abortion when they're buying health insurance." He also notes that "oftentimes, the policyholder is not the beneficiary." Another amendment by Enzi states that "[s]tate insurance exchanges could not be required to offer plans covering abortion," Waldman writes. In this amendment, "Enzi did something that definitely moves government policy away from the status quo in a markedly pro-life direction," he adds, noting that "Enzi deleted the part saying that exchanges would have to offer abortion-covering plans -- but left in the clause saying they'd be forced to offer no-abortion-coverage plans!" (Waldman, Beliefnet, 9/22).

"The Continuing Search for the Female Condom," Feminists for Choice: "The No. 1 reason that insertive condoms [for women] are hard to find is their expense," which "is due mostly to high production costs influenced by material, packaging requirements, and location," the blog states. "A second reason that they have been so hard to find is their newness," according to the blog, which notes that female condoms "are still new to the safer-sex scene (less than 20 years), lots of people have no idea they exist, and/or are very resistant to trying them." The blog continues, "This reticence translates into people not buying them," which illustrates how "access is directly related to economics; stores don't want to carry an expensive product that they can't sell." On the issue of availability, the blog states that the "Female Health Company, which makes insertive condoms, has been working on lowering those production costs and making insertive condoms more widely distributed." The blog adds that the newest female condom, FC2, is about 30% less expensive than its first incarnation. It was approved by FDA last year and released earlier this month (Feminists for Choice, 9/22).

"On the Ballot: Ban Contraception?" Lynn Harris, Salon's "Broadsheet": One reason the first attempt to pass a so-called "personhood" amendment in Colorado failed so "convincingly" was that voters realized that defining fertilized eggs as people could restrict contraception, in vitro fertilization, termination of ectopic pregnancies and other women's health care, Harris writes. She continues that "the proposed 2010 ballot language for the next go-round ... vagues it up even more, reading: 'the term 'person' shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.'" Meanwhile, in Florida, "the next emerging battleground, a proposed constitutional amendment would specifically ban not only abortion but also emergency contraception and the [birth control] pill," Harris writes. "Look, contraception-as-abortifacient is a preposterous conversation to begin with -- but here we are," she writes, adding, "And there's plenty of other lying and dissembling going on about abortion as we speak." Harris concludes, "The farther these folks and their fatuous arguments and amendments push the conversation toward crazytown, the more reasonable everyone else ... looks by comparison," adding, "Which may be in part how we got here in the first place" (Harris, "Broadsheet," Salon, 9/23).

"Failing African-American Mothers and Babies," Amie Newman, RH Reality Check: Maternal and infant mortality among blacks in the U.S. is "a topic that, frankly, deserves much more attention from movements and communities across the spectrum," as blacks have an infant mortality rate that is 2.3 times higher than that for non-Hispanic whites, Newman writes. "While we make our best efforts to shine a much needed light on the health of women in the developing world as worthy recipients of our attention, one must ask why the health of women in this country is not being given equally deserving attention," she continues. She reports that 16 states of the 39 with black populations that are large enough for analysis "experienced rising black [infant mortality] rates between the 1998-2000 and 2002-2004 period." Newman writes, "Clearly, this gap persists, and it's not enough to continue to question." The "key" is "for all of us to agree that the lives of [black] women and their babies are worth saving," she writes, adding, "In order to make real progress, we must see attention paid to this problem by President Obama, Congress, advocacy and grassroots organizations, the medical community, activists, and the mainstream and alternative media" (Newman, RH Reality Check, 9/24).

"The Moral Equivalent of Anti-Slavery," Michelle Goldberg, American Prospect's "Tapped": Sheryl WuDunn and New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof's book, "Half the Sky," "presents a catalogue of horrors, including sex slavery, obstetric fistula, female genital mutilation, gang rape, honor killing and AIDS," Goldberg writes, adding that the book is "particularly impressive" because it is "an almost impossible task to channel outrage so consistently without leaving readers overwhelmed and tempted to tune out." She continues, "In some ways, there's not much new in 'Half the Sky.' ... Yet despite the expert consensus, the true scope of women's dehumanization worldwide and the toll it takes on the planet's prospects haven't really penetrated most people's consciousness," which is why WuDunn and Kristof's book "is so valuable." The authors "are advocates, but they are journalists first, and that means they don't shy away from pointing out failures as well as success in the field," Goldberg writes. They have "seen how the combination of grassroots activism and international support can change both individual lives and seemingly unalterable cultural patterns." Goldberg reports that Kristof and WuDunn write in the book, "'Progress really is possible; challenges are insurmountable only until the moment that they're surmounted.'" Goldberg concludes, "By the end of this galvanizing book, even inveterate pessimists may believe them" (Goldberg, "Tapped," American Prospect, 9/25). Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.