Wal-Mart Women Vow to Press Bias Fight in Lower Court, U.S. Rights Agency

The women who sought to sue Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) for gender bias on behalf of 1.5 million co-workers said they will press their fight against the nation’s largest private employer in smaller lawsuits in lower courts and claims with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday said the women failed to prove the world’s largest retailer had a nationwide policy that led to gender discrimination. The court deprived them of the leverage a nationwide suit brings, both in pooled legal resources and a potential multibillion-dollar verdict, forcing them to pursue claims on their own.

“When I go back to work tomorrow, I’m going to let them know we are still fighting,” said Christine Kwapnoski, an assistant manager at a Sam’s Club in Concord, California. She had accused a male manager of yelling at female employees and telling her to “doll up” by wearing more makeup and dressing better while working on a loading dock.

Wal-Mart may now face thousands of lawsuits nationwide and claims of discrimination before federal agencies as plaintiffs’ lawyers fan out to courts across the country to file new complaints on behalf of members of the failed group suit.

Kwapnoski and others pressing their suit claimed they were victimized by Wal-Mart’s practice of letting local managers make subjective decisions about pay and promotions. More than 100 employees filed sworn statements saying they were paid less and given fewer opportunities for promotion than male colleagues.

Women seeking advancement were required to commit in writing to overnight shifts for two years, while men were only required to rotate through such positions on a six-month basis, one former worker claimed.

Retail for Housewives

(For a related story on the Supreme Court ruling’s impact on class action litigation, click here. To read a story on how it may affect defenses against employee claims, click here. For a story on how the decision may affect company bias policies, click here.)

When one woman inquired about the higher wages paid to men who had the same or less seniority, she was told that “retail is for housewives who just need to earn extra money,” and “he has a family to support,” according to one declaration by a former Wal-Mart employee in Florida.

Wal-Mart said yesterday that the high court ruling “effectively ends this class-action lawsuit.”

“As the majority made clear, the plaintiffs’ claims were worlds away from showing a companywide pay and promotion policy,” Wal-Mart, led by Chief Executive Officer Mike Duke, said in a statement.

Wal-Mart rose 25 cents to $53.29 in New York Stock Exchange trading.

The workers “provide no convincing proof of a companywide discriminatory pay and promotion policy,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority. All nine justices voted to overturn a lower-court ruling that approved the class action, with four of them saying they would have ordered further proceedings.

Unbalanced Promotions

Betty Dukes, another lead plaintiff who began working at a Pittsburg, California-based Wal-Mart store in 1994, said she noticed early in her career that “it was not balanced” when it came to promotions.

“The men at my store were being promoted more often than the woman for the same positions, and many of those positions were never openly posted,” she said in a telephone interview. Promotion opportunities were disclosed by management, which was predominantly male, she said.

Filed in 2001, the suit aimed to cover every woman who worked at the retailer’s Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club’s stores at any point since December 1998, including those not hired until years after the suit was filed. A federal appeals court had let the suit go forward on behalf of women who were working at Wal-Mart at the time the suit was filed.

Twenty Companies

More than 20 companies supported Wal-Mart at the Supreme Court, including Intel Corp. (INTC), Altria Group Inc. (MO), Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) and General Electric Co. (GE)

The Supreme Court ruling limits the ability of plaintiffs’ lawyers to win multimillion-dollar damages through a single lawsuit, particularly against employers. Units of Cigna Corp. (CI), Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), Bayer AG (BAYN), Toshiba Corp. (6502), Publicis Group SA, Deere & Co. (DE) and Costco Wholesale Corp. (COST) all face gender discrimination complaints that seek class-action status.

Four justices — Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — said they would have returned the case to a lower court and let the workers try to press a class action using a different legal theory.

The lead attorneys for the plaintiffs are Joseph Sellers of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll and Brad Seligman of the Impact Fund, which describes itself as a foundation that handles public interest litigation.

Aggrieved Workers

They said they would seek a way around the Supreme Court ruling, moving ahead with claims on behalf of aggrieved workers, either as individuals or as part of smaller groups.

“This case is not over,” said Seligman. “Wal-Mart is not off the hook. There are thousands of claims of discrimination that remain to be filed.”

The case was one of the most closely watched Supreme Court business disputes in years, in part because the justices hadn’t looked at the standards for certifying a class-action suit in more than a decade.

Women’s advocates called on Congress to enact new legislation protecting the rights of female workers in light of the high court decision.

“With this decision, the Supreme Court has assisted Wal- Mart in its efforts to systematically dole out promotions and pay raises on the basis of sex,” said Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women.

Washington Protest

At a protest against the ruling today in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, about 100 demonstrators called for passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act, legislation intended to address pay inequity issues tied to gender.

Allison Grady, a protester with the Feminists Majority Foundation, said the demonstrators “wanted to be able to show that we were standing with the women of Wal-Mart.”

White House spokesman Jay Carney yesterday declined to comment on the case, while saying President Barack Obama supports proposed federal legislation to ensure pay equity for women in the workplace.

“We still are determined to go forward to present our case in court,” said Dukes, the lead named plaintiff in the case. “We believe we will prevail there.”

She and her co-plaintiffs alleged the world’s biggest retailer discriminated against them on the basis of their sex by denying them equal pay or promotions, in violation of 1964 civil rights law. The court didn’t rule the company discriminated.

Stephanie Odle, 39, who initiated the lawsuit after being fired from a Sam’s Club in 1999, said yesterday was a “great day” for big business.

“It shows how the legal system works,” Odle said in a telephone interview. “But I know in my heart that I made a difference. I didn’t get the outcome we wanted, but the minute that we filed the lawsuit, we started getting changes in pay and promotions.”

Trumped-Up Charge

Odle was working as an assistant manager in a Sam’s Club in Lubbock, Texas, when she was fired.

“They trumped up a charge and terminated me to give the job to a man,” she claimed.

Odle now owns her own business in Norman, Oklahoma. She was one of the original six plaintiffs who pursued the class action against Wal-Mart. She was dropped as a named plaintiff after a lower court decided all the class representatives needed to be from California.

Odle said she worked for Sam’s Club for eight years, in stores in several states.

“I’ve seen the discrimination, no matter what state you’re in, no matter what region,” she said. “I gave up my right to sue individually” while the class action was pending, Odle said. “Now I go back and sue them individually.”

‘Range of Options’

“We had prepared for a whole range of options,” attorney Sellers said in an interview. “We began weeks ago preparing thousands of charges to be filed with the EEOC,” referring to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which pursues workplace claims on behalf of employees.

Lawyers for the woman will try to pursue “some more narrowly drawn, tailored classes,” the lawyer said. “The case becomes splintered. You end up with multiple cases where Wal- Mart’s practices are being challenged.”

Federal lawsuits and claims before the EEOC won’t be stopped by the statute of limitations, which places a time limit on lawsuits, he said, because it was delayed while the proposed class action was pending.

Sellers and co-counsel Seligman said they would be pursuing individual actions against the company, and possibly smaller class actions.

They may also go back to the federal court in San Francisco where the claim was originally filed, seeking a narrowly drawn case of California plaintiffs, he said, and bringing lawsuits with different arguments in different jurisdictions.

“This will be a multi-front sort of battle,” he said. “There are a number of options still available — none of them are as efficient” as a nationwide class action.

Contingency Fee

Since class action litigation is prosecuted on a contingency fee basis — lawyers get paid when the client wins – - lawyers for the plaintiffs said they will continue to finance the litigation.

“We’re in it to see this thing to a successful conclusion,” Sellers said, adding that $3 million in expenses have already been paid. “Millions of dollars in attorneys fees have been expended and we haven’t been paid a penny.”

The cost of defending thousands of lawsuits in hundreds of courthouses may be expensive for Wal-Mart as well.

“Wal-Mart may regret the day” it sought a rejection of class certification, Seligman said. “Wal-Mart is not off the hook.”

The case is Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, 10-00277, U.S. Supreme Court (Washington).

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-21/wal-mart-women-vow-to-press-bias-fight-in-lower-court-u-s-rights-agency.html

Kansas Abortion Bill Poised To Become Law

TOPEKA, Kan. — Kansas legislators approved restrictions on private insurance coverage for abortions and adopted a state budget stripping funds from a Planned Parenthood affiliate, capping a string of victories Friday for abortion opponents only four months after sympathetic Gov. Sam Brownback took office.

This year, five major proposals favored by abortion opponents cleared the GOP-dominated Legislature as members heeded a call from Brownback to create “a culture of life.” But Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, the target of much of lawmakers’ efforts, confirmed that it is consulting with attorneys over possible legal challenges

“Four or five anti-choice bills, as we would characterize them, is pretty significant,” said Tait Sye, a spokesman for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “It would be in the top tier of anti-choice legislatures, which is probably what Brownback wants.”

Brownback, a Republican, is expected to sign the bill sent to him by the state House a mere 15 minutes before lawmakers adjourned their annual session. The House’s early-morning vote was 86-30 in support of a larger bill that included the abortion coverage restrictions. The state Senate had approved it Thursday night, 28-10.

The measure prohibits insurance companies from offering coverage of abortions as part of their general health plans, except when a woman’s life is at risk. If the bill becomes law as expected, starting in July, individuals and employers who want abortion coverage would have to buy supplemental policies that cover only abortion.

Supporters of the bill argue that it will protect employers who oppose abortion rights from having to pay for policies that cover the procedures. The legislation also says that no state or federally administered health-insurance exchange in Kansas established under last year’s federal health care overhaul law can offer coverage for abortions, other than to save a woman’s life.

The $13.8 billion budget approved by legislators, also early Friday, includes a provision diverting about $330,000 in federal family planning funds away from Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri to public hospitals and health departments. The group’s top executive warned that it will be forced to reduce services dramatically at clinics in Hays and Wichita that don’t perform abortions without affecting one in the Kansas City suburbs that terminates pregnancies.

Brownback already has signed legislation to tighten restrictions on late-term abortions and require doctors to obtain written permission from parents before terminating minors’ pregnancies. Legislators also have sent him a bill to impose new health and safety standards specifically for abortion clinics, which the governor plans to sign Monday.

“Governor Brownback has never been shy about the fact that he’s pro-life,” spokeswoman Sherriene Jones-Sontag said.

Kathy Ostrowski, legislative director for the anti-abortion group Kansans for Life, said the state’s new laws will protect women who seek abortions from dangerous clinics and provide more accurate reporting by doctors about their activities.

“It has obviously been a good session,” Ostrowski said after lawmakers adjourned.

Democratic Govs. Kathleen Sebelius and Mark Parkinson, who held the office before Brownback, blocked most major changes in Kansas abortion laws, vetoing legislation that is becoming law this year.

“There’s clearly a message here that women are dispensable,” said state Rep. Annie Kuether, a Topeka Democrat and one of the Legislature’s shrinking number of abortion rights supporters. “I’m sick and tired of being treated like a second-class citizen.”

The measures in Kansas are part of a wave of anti-abortion legislation across the nation, as abortion opponents have been encouraged by the election of new Republican governors last year and conservative legislators.

The Guttmacher Institute, a research organization supporting abortion rights, says Kansas and Missouri are among seven states now with restrictions on private health insurance coverage of abortion. Also, a dozen states, including Kansas, restrict coverage in health exchanges.

Planned Parenthood officials say moves to strip funds from affiliates are afoot in at least five other states; one in Indiana has filed a lawsuit there.

“Why would we want to continue to give Planned Parenthood tax dollars to ostensibly prevent pregnancy, when they make even more money performing abortions when that ‘prevention’ fails?” said Mary Kay Culp, Kansans for Life’s executive director.

But Brownlie said the Planned Parenthood clinics offer a wide range of services, including thousands of breast exams and tests for sexually transmitted diseases each year. The federal dollars account for about 10 percent of the budget for its Kansas operations, he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/13/kansas-abortion-bill-law_n_861525.html

Relief offer for unwed mothers hits a raw nerve

PALAKKAD: Various tribes and social organisations in Attappady have come out against the decision of the State government on Wednesday to provide one acre (0.4 hectare) of land and a monthly pension of Rs.1,000 to unwed tribal mothers.

Eswari Reshan, district panchayat member, said on Thursday that the decision was “an insult not only to tribal women but also to womanhood.”

She said some tribal women had come to her protesting against the reopening of old issues, saying that to get financial assistance, they were being forced to file cases against the men who had deserted them. Doing so would aggravate the stigma they faced for giving birth out of wedlock.

Rather than give relief, she said, the government should bring to book the men who had deserted the women after having a child or two. Some women had been abandoned by men who had legally married them. The relief announced would only encourage those who wanted to exploit women.

Ms. Reshan said the government should enforce the law against such cheating and exploitation. Provision of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act should be invoked.

On the government’s promise of land, Ms. Reshan said most unwed mothers owned two acres to five acres of land, but had no resources to cultivate it. The government should fund cultivation and offer employment and educational opportunities.

‘Atrocities will go up’

P.R.G. Mathur, expert in tribal affairs and former Director of the Kerala Institute for Research, Training and Development of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (KIRTADS), said the government’s decision would promote atrocities on tribal women, besides being an insult to them and womanhood.

Would the government apply the same yardstick to unwed mothers of other communities in various parts of the State, he asked.

Dr. Mathur said the government’s duty was to implement the law and bring the culprits to book. The men, not the government, should be made to pay for the crime.

He cited examples from Madhya Pradesh of men who had ditched tribal women being brought before the law and made to marry the victims and look after their family.

He said that Kerala government should immediately conduct a survey on unwed mothers in tribal areas.

M. Sukumaran, president, Attappady Samrakshana Samithi (protection committee), said no civilised society could accept the government’s decision, as it went against the law of the land.

http://www.hindu.com/2011/05/27/stories/2011052758170600.htm

House bans funds for teaching abortion techniques

WASHINGTON – The House voted Wednesday to ban teaching health centers from using federal money to train doctors on how to perform abortions, the latest in a series of anti-abortion measures pushed by the Republican majority.

The author of the measure, Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., said she wanted to make it “crystal clear that taxpayer money is not being used to train health care providers to perform abortion procedures.”

The proposal was presented as an amendment to the latest of several GOP bills to restrict funding for the health care act that was enacted last year. This bill gives Congress control over spending for a program to encourage health centers to provide training to medical residents. The amendment applies to funding in that grant program.

The Foxx amendment passed 234-182 despite the objections of some Democrats that it would prevent health centers from teaching a basic medical technique that can be critical to saving a woman’s life during emergencies.

“This amendment would jeopardize both education and women’s health care by obliterating funding for a necessary full range of medical training by health care professionals,” said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo.

The Foxx amendment and the overall bill to restrict the health care act both are likely to die in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Since coming to power in January, the Republican majority in the House has acted to write permanently into law the ban on federal funds to perform abortions, to make it easier for hospitals to refuse abortion cases and to make it more expensive for small businesses to choose insurance plans under the health care act that provide abortion coverage. The House unsuccessfully tried to cut off federal money for Planned Parenthood as part of the battle over this year’s budget.

“If organizations want to provide elective abortions or train abortion doctors they need to find someone other than taxpayers to write the checks,” Foxx said.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said Foxx’s amendment was an unprecedented restriction on medical training. “Regardless of how one feels about legal abortion, reasonable lawmakers can agree that doctors should be as well-trained as possible to deal with any medical situation that may arise,” she said.

The amendment also states that no funds available under the grant program can be used to perform abortions and that teaching health centers will not be eligible for funds if they discriminate against providers that deny abortion services.

Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the anti-abortion group National Right to Life, said the anti-discrimination provision was important because “the Obama administration has severely weakened enforcement of existing laws.”

He said conscience protections get a better reception in the Senate and that, even if the Senate does not act, it was important for the House to push its anti-abortion agenda. “It usually takes more than one Congress to accomplish worthwhile legislative goals,” Johnson said. “It is necessary often to build up momentum over several Congresses.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110525/ap_on_re_us/us_house_abortion_4

Masked South Korean sex workers rally against police crackdown on brothels

SEOUL, South Korea — Hundreds of prostitutes and pimps rallied Tuesday near a red-light district in Seoul to protest a police crackdown on brothels, with some unsuccessfully attempting to set themselves on fire.

A crowd of about 400 people, mostly women wearing baseball caps, masks and sunglasses, chanted slogans like, “Guarantee the right to live!” during the four-hour rally.

At one point, about 20 protesters in their underwear and covered in body and face paint doused themselves in flammable liquid in an apparent attempt to burn themselves, but others stopped them from lighting any flames. Some of the women then sat in the street and wept and screamed, while other protesters consoled them.

Minor scuffles between protesters and police officers erupted after the rally, but there were no reports of major injuries.

Prostitution is illegal in South Korea but is widespread despite repeated government crackdowns.

The rally comes weeks after officials began stationing police cars near brothels in a bid to drive away people looking to pay for sex.

The sex workers accuse a nearby department store of pushing police to take such measures. Police deny the claim.

As part of their protest, a group of prostitutes on Sunday tried to buy expensive items at the department store with only coins; when they were rejected, they placed large piles of coins on the department store’s floors.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/masked-south-korean-sex-workers-rally-against-police-crackdown-on-brothels/2011/05/17/AFMCbW5G_story.html?wprss=rss_world

Welfare recipient drug testing passes state legislature

Legislation to mandate drug testing for people on welfare is on its way to the governor’s desk.

The House signed off on the bill this morning, which was even tougher when it came back from the senate.

“Recipients of welfare benefits, commonly called TANF, would have a drug test if there’s reasonable cause to believe that they may be using drugs illegally,” said Rep. Ellen Brandom (R) of Sikeston

Under the bill, welfare recipients would lose their benefits for three years if they fail a urine test that screens for narcotics.

The House originally said one year, but the Senate pushed it to three. The measure would allow drug users to receive benefits again after a time if they complete a drug treatment program and do not test positive again.

Critics say the legislation will have little deterrent value without treatment…

“And until we solve the underlying problem of drug abuse, you can take the money away all you want, those parents are gonna find a way to get the drugs,” said Rep. Genise Montecillo, (D), of St. Louis

Others question the expense.

“We’re gonna cost the taxpayers of this state a million dollars. And we don’t actually know how much it’s gonna save,” said Rep. Jacob Hummel (D), St. Louis. 

The senate also added a provision to require that the electronic cards used to claim welfare benefits include a photo of the recipient and be renewed every three years.

Lawmakers say that comes from recipients selling their cards to third parties for cash.

http://www.connectmidmissouri.com/news/story.aspx?id=616537

UK: Women and the coalition: mothers’ and child benefits

The coalition may present itself, like all the main political parties, as pro-family, but it is mothers who have become the “shock absorbers” for the coalition’s cuts in welfare benefits and childcare provision, say critics.

From cuts to maternity grants and child benefits, to closures of Sure Start centres, childcare schemes and after-school clubs, it is women – particularly single mothers on low incomes – who bear the brunt of attempts to reduce the deficit.

The changes will affect women’s incomes and ability to enter the job market, critics say, and put many at risk of poverty. “The disproportionate impact of the cuts on women raises issues of fairness and calls into question the idea of society sharing the weight of national debt reduction,” said Abigail Davies, assistant director of policy and practice at the Chartered Institute of Housing. “Overall the public spending cuts are known to impact disproportionately on single parent families, most of which are headed by women. Cuts to benefits and public spending, coupled with stricter job-seeking expectations for lone parents claiming benefits, will trap some women in an impossible situation.”

Benefit cuts that affect women include reductions in the childcare tax credit, the Sure Start maternity grant, and the health in pregnancy grant, and the freezing of child benefit rates for three years.

Katherine Rake, chief executive of the Family and Parenting Institute, said: “The targeting of family benefits for cutbacks in the last 12 months means women’s incomes have been disproportionately hit. For many women, child benefit was the only source of income they received directly, giving them independence and control over family spending. The coalition’s decision to end universal child benefit was therefore a particularly painful blow.”

There are concerns that single parents – most of whom are women – will also be unfairly affected by housing benefit reform. “This will require some families to move, which is expensive, unsettling, affects [children's] educational performance, and puts families into less economically successful areas with reduced employment opportunities,” said Davies. “Cuts to tax credits, Sure Start, after-school clubs and so on, create further barriers to employment for single parents.

“The government wants to encourage social mobility and tackle poverty, but these cuts do not create an environment which supports women or enables them to help themselves.”

Despite the government’s commitment to guarantee 15 hours a week free childcare provision, childcare support has been badly hit by local authority spending cuts. These have led to widespread cuts in Sure Start children’s centres and after-school and holiday play schemes. Although many councils have committed themselves to keeping centres open, most have reduced services drastically.

A survey of mothers using Sure Start centres, carried out in February by the Daycare Trust charity, found that 35% felt that the removal or reduction of services would leave them more socially isolated, and 32% felt it would be harder to see their midwife or health visitor.

Rake said there had been some positive policy developments for mothers over the past 12 months, such as proposals for shared postnatal parental leave, and to extend rights to flexible working. She added: “The government must deliver on these proposals if it is to make strides towards a truly family-friendly society.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/may/20/women-coalition-mothers-child-benefits

New Texas law mandates sonograms before abortion

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) – Texas Governor Rick Perry on Thursday signed into law a measure requiring women seeking an abortion in the state to first get a sonogram.

Texas is one of several U.S. states with strong Republican legislative majorities proposing new restrictions on abortion this year. The Republican governor had designated the bill as an emergency legislative priority, putting it on a fast track.

Under the law, women will have to wait 24 hours after the sonogram before having an abortion, though the waiting time is two hours for those who live more than 100 miles from an abortion provider.

“Governor Perry was pleased to sign this important legislation, which bolsters our efforts to protect life by ensuring Texans are fully informed when considering such an important decision,” said Katherine Cesinger, a spokeswoman for the governor.

A sonogram is an imaging technique using high-frequency sound waves to produce images of a developing baby in a woman’s uterus.

Under the measure, women will be offered the option of hearing the heartbeat and seeing the sonogram image, which they may decline. But the woman’s doctor must describe the image, explaining the size of the embryo or fetus and the presence of organs and limbs.

In certain cases, including those involving rape and incest victims or serious fetal abnormalities, the woman could decline to hear the description of the sonogram.

Opponents of the legislation said the law interferes in the doctor-patient relationship by adding a government requirement for a procedure that could be traumatizing to women going through an already difficult situation.

During debate on the House floor in March, Democratic state Representative Carol Alvarado wielded a trans-vaginal probe used for sonograms early in pregnancy.

“This is government intrusion at its best,” she said during that debate.

http://dailynews.muzi.com/news/ll/english/10109243.shtml

Texas Legislation Adds Conditions on Abortion

DALLAS—Texas Gov. Rick Perry is expected to sign a law soon requiring a woman seeking an abortion to have a sonogram and hear a description of the fetus, including whether it has developed fingers, toes or internal organs.

The goal, supporters say, is to improve medical care for women and encourage them to reconsider having abortions.

“We believe that when they see the miracle of life some will change their minds,” said Dan Patrick, a Republican state senator who represents part of Houston and who sponsored the legislation, which passed both houses of the state legislature last week.

Abortion-rights supporters say there is no evidence that sonograms, also known as ultrasounds, affect a woman’s decision on abortion, and say laws requiring doctors to perform the procedures and describe the results violate patients’ rights.

“It discounts women’s ability to make health decisions and interferes with the doctor-patient relationship,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, a New York non-profit that opposes restrictions on legal abortion.

The group filed a suit challenging a similar law adopted last year in Oklahoma, contending that it violates state constitutional guarantees of privacy for patients and free speech for doctors. A state judge blocked enforcement of the law until the suit is resolved. The group plans to mount a legal challenge to the Texas legislation, if Gov. Perry signs it.

The Texas bill also calls for a 24-hour waiting period between the sonogram and the abortion, except for women who live more than 100 miles from a clinic. Opponents say that waiting period places more burdens on women.

Associated PressGovernor Rick Perry is expected to sign the measure soon.

Big Decision

Among provisions in Texas’s proposed measure on abortion:

Any woman seeking an abortion is required to have a sonogram and to hear a developmental description of the fetus.

Rape victims, minors or women carrying fetuses with abnormalities are exempt from hearing the description.

Women may sign waivers opting not to see the sonogram image or hear the heartbeat.

Required 24-hour waiting period between sonogram and abortion, except for patients more than 100 miles from clinic.

In the past decade, more than 20 states have passed laws involving sonograms for women seeking abortions. Most simply require that ultrasounds be performed. But the Texas and Oklahoma laws, as well as legislation under consideration in Alabama, go further by requiring a woman who wants an abortion to be told in detail about her fetus’s development.

Under the Texas law, all women seeking an abortion must have a sonogram but those who have been raped, are minors or who are carrying a fetus with abnormalities are exempt from hearing the description of the image. All women seeking abortions can sign a waiver and choose not to view the image or hear the fetus’s heartbeat.

Groups that oppose abortion say ultrasound can be a powerful tool in persuading a woman considering an abortion to continue her pregnancy.

“Ultrasound is literally a window into the womb,” said Kelly Rosati, vice-president of Focus on the Family, a Colorado Springs, Co., ministry. “She actually connects with that child inside of her.”

Focus on the Family has supplied grants to install 520 sonogram machines in pregnancy centers run by abortion opponents around the country. Ms. Rosati calculates that the ultrasound images have prevented 90,000 abortions since 2004. The figure is based on patients’ stated plans after their sonograms; the centers have no way of determining whether the patients gave birth or had abortions, she added.

Many abortion clinics already routinely perform sonograms to determine a pregnancy’s length, said Elizabeth Nash of the Guttmacher Institute, a New York group that researches reproductive health and favors abortion rights.

At Whole Woman’s Health, a network of clinics in Texas, women seeking abortions can see their sonograms and discuss them with doctors, said Terry Sallas Merritt, a clinic executive. Some women ask for a printout of the image to take home.

“The difference is that it’s up to her,” said Ms. Sallas Merritt. “It’s not the legislators telling her what she must hear before she’s allowed to exercise her right to have an abortion or have a child.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704681904576315350526209130.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Some Women May No Longer Be Eligible for Credit Cards

The federal government is cracking down on who can and cannot own credit cards –and for some women, these changes could have dire consequences.

Under new rules in development by the Federal Reserve Board, banks will have to consider a consumer’s individual income as part of the credit card application process. Your household income or assets will no longer factor into the equation if you need credit.

This appears to be yet another law with unintended consequences. Although regulators undoubtedly saw these changes as a way to make it more difficult for consumers without income –particularly, underage students and the unemployed –to get in over their heads with credit card debt, they obviously missed an important point.

The result of this oversight is a gigantic step backward for women with little or no income of their own. That means the rules have changed significantly for stay-at-home moms, retirees and asset-rich, but income-poor women.

Think about it. If banks can only look at each applicant’s individual income –and not at their household income or assets, as they were able to do in the past –then these women will be shut out from obtaining credit, unless their husbands co-sign for them.

The implications could be quite serious. For example, establishing independent credit is often an essential first step towards ending an abusive marriage. Will these changes by the Fed make it harder for women to leave a dangerous domestic partnership? Likewise, once these rules go into effect, any woman considering divorce will find it more difficult to separate credit card accounts and establish credit on her own. If she can’t access marital funds because her husband controls those assets and she cannot establish any credit or a sufficient amount of credit in her own name, how will she get the funds required to hire competent divorce professionals?

A handful of advocacy groups and legislators are beginning to take notice. Earlier this year, US Representatives Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) and Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) asked the Fed to maintain the household income or assets measure for non-working spouses. This excerpt from their letter outlines some of the problems with the new regulations:

We are concerned that the Board’s proposal will hamper a stay-at-home mom’s ability to establish her own independent credit history by applying independently for a card. Many stay-at-home moms have a strong work history, yet the proposed regulations ignore their demonstrated credit-worthiness because of their lack of current market income. While stay-at-home moms may not be contributing to the market economy as workers, they make the majority of the day-to-day financial decisions on behalf of their household. Women’s consumer power represents 73 percent of household spending, or over $4 trillion in annual discretionary spending. Finally, requiring married women to have their own earnings in order to qualify for credit represents a serious risk for women in abusive domestic partnerships. Women trapped in abusive marriages may be unable to work due to a controlling spouse, a hallmark of relationships characterized by domestic violence. The availability of an independent credit card may represent her best chance at establishing independence and a path out of a dangerous relationship. By not allowing these women to apply independently for a credit card, the proposed regulations represent a significant -and potentially dangerous set-back. We would accordingly urge the Board to amend its proposed rules so that issuers have the flexibility to consider household income in the cases of non-working spouses applying for credit.

Despite the negative impacts on some women, policy specialists aren’t expecting the Fed to budge on its decision. As Businessweek puts it, “fixing the mom flap won’t be easy, especially in the post-financial-crisis environment where regulatory zeal is the norm.”

If you’re a woman without your own income, you’re probably wondering, “Is there anything I CAN do to help establish credit in my name?”

Of course, there is – but, don’t expect it to be easy.

If you don’t have your own income, you can start to establish credit in your name by:

• Creating a solid credit history as an authorized user on a shared card.
• Putting utilities and other accounts in your name. Of course, you must also  pay these bills on time! Every honored commitment helps build your credit history.
• Using a secured credit card.

More importantly, you should immediately start stashing away as much money as possible. (See more details in my article about the 9 Critical Steps Women Should Take To Prepare For Divorce).

If you have sufficient liquid assets available, not only will you be able to access those funds with a debit card, but hopefully you should be able to get a secured credit card with a higher limit.

Fortunately, you still have a few months to plan accordingly and possibly still get credit under the old rules. The Fed’s rule changes aren’t set to go into effect until October 1. Keep in mind, though, that credit card issuers can start enforcing these rules at any time.

http://blogs.forbes.com/jefflanders/2011/05/10/even-affluent-women-may-no-longer-be-eligible-for-credit-cards/

Conservatives target program serving 120,000 women monthly

AUSTIN — A state health program that helps low-income women get birth control, Pap smears and cancer screenings could cease to exist as some lawmakers try to shore up their anti-abortion credentials.

About 120,000 women are covered monthly by the Women’s Medicaid Health Program, which must be renewed this year to continue. The state provides about $3 million annually to keep the program afloat and gets about $28 million in matching money from the federal government.

The Health and Human Services Commission estimates that, if renewed, the program would save the state about $84 million over the next two years by reducing unwanted pregnancies through contraceptives.

But conservative Republican state lawmakers, who have launched an

effort to cripple funding for abortion providers and “affiliate” organizations that work with them, are pushing a bill that could eliminate the program altogether.

A measure by state Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, would continue the health program but includes a provision that stipulates that it would cease to exist if organizations such as Planned Parenthood challenge the state in court and win access to funding.

“I think the election shows that a great majority of voters put people in office that do not want money to go to abortion providers or their affiliates,” Deuell said.

Deuell’s bill passed out of the Health and Human Services committee on a 5-1 vote and is headed to the full Senate.

State Sen. José Rodríguez, D-El Paso, cast the only vote against the bill.

Rodríguez said he opposes the bill because it cuts money for Planned Parenthood, which “has a track record and a history of providing services without complaints under the Women’s Health Program.”

By law, state and federal money for the program cannot be used for abortions.

Planned Parenthood provides abortions but has clinics that do not. Those clinics get funding through the program to offer women’s health services such as birth control and cancer screenings.

Rodríguez said his biggest concern with the bill is that if the state loses a lawsuit, the program could be eliminated entirely.

“We should have some kind of fallback position in the event that there is a successful challenge so that this program continues,” he said.

In 2005 the Legislature passed a bill establishing the Women’s Medicaid Health Program with an amendment that barred abortion providers or their affiliates from receiving funding.

Through the program, low-income women can visit a variety of health-care providers and get free health screenings, birth control and gynecological exams.

When the program was being implemented in 2007, lawyers from the Health and Human Services Commission said the exclusion of clinics that are connected in some way to abortion providers would not withstand a legal challenge. They advised the commission’s director to allow organizations such as Planned Parenthood to participate.

Since then, the attorney general has issued an opinion allowing the state to enforce the amendment. The state’s Health and Human Services Commission is now implementing measures that would bar organizations such as Planned Parenthood from receiving the money, officials said.

Planned Parenthood officials said that each year through the program their agency provides birth control and services such as cancer screenings to more than 40,000 women.

Peter Durkin, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, said the organization is “prepared to move forward with a lawsuit if that’s what it takes to continue to provide cervical cancer screenings and other health care to the women who depend on our health centers.”

The bill will have to get 21 votes to be heard on the Senate floor. That would require that at least two Democrats support the measure.

Republican lawmakers, as part of their anti-abortion platform, removed funding for women’s health and family planning services in the Texas House budget and have sought to advance similar measures in the Senate.

http://www.elpasotimes.com/news/ci_17986546?source=rss

More U.S. women using “morning-after” pill

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – More U.S. women seem to be using the “morning-after” pill now that the emergency contraceptive is available over-the-counter, a new study finds.

Researchers found that between 2006 and 2008, about twice as many women ages 15 to 44 said they had used emergency contraception, compared with four to six years earlier — when it was still restricted to prescription-only.

The emergency contraceptive Plan B has been available in the U.S. since 1999. The pills, which contain the hormone progestin, cut the risk of pregnancy after unprotected sex by stopping the ovaries from releasing an egg.

However, the contraceptive must be taken within 72 hours of having sex — and the sooner, the better. After the first 12 hours the risk of pregnancy increases by 50 percent.

So in 2006, after years of political controversy, the U.S. approved Plan B for “behind-the-counter” sales to adults — meaning they could get it from a pharmacy without waiting for a prescription. The age restriction was later lowered to 17 in 2009.

In the new study, researchers looked at data from a periodic government survey to see how national rates of emergency-contraception use may be changing.

They found that of more than 6,300 sexually active U.S. women surveyed between 2006 and 2008, nearly 10 percent said they had ever used emergency contraception.

That compared with a rate of about 4 percent among women surveyed in 2002, according to findings published in the journal Fertility and Sterility.

“It has more than doubled since the last time the data were collected,” said Megan L. Kavanaugh, a senior research associate at the Guttmacher Institute in New York who worked on the study.

However, she said in an interview, “its use still seems relatively low, given that it’s easy to access. So there’s room for improvement.”

Kavanaugh and her colleagues think that media attention is likely the reason for the increase in emergency-contraception use in 2006-2008.

The researchers found no change over time in the percentage of women who said their doctors had discussed emergency contraception with them. In both survey periods, 3

percent of women said they’d received such counseling in the past year.

That lack of change is not especially surprising, according to Kavanaugh, since smaller studies have suggested that health providers are not often bringing the topic up.

She suggested that women who want to learn more about emergency contraception ask their doctors — but as part of a discussion on all of their options for preventing unplanned pregnancy.

Emergency contraception is not intended as an alternative to routine, and more effective, birth-control options, like the Pill.

Instead, experts say, it should be used as a backup when routine birth-control fails — such as when a diaphragm slips, a condom breaks or a woman forgets to take her birth control pills. Emergency contraception is also used in cases of rape.

The hope, Kavanaugh noted, had been that emergency contraception would lower the national rate of unintended pregnancy. “But so far there’s no evidence that this is happening,” she said.

Regardless, Kavanaugh told Reuters Health, women should know that emergency birth control is an option.

“I think it’s important that the public be aware that, number one, emergency contraception exists, and that it’s available over the counter,” Kavanaugh said.

Along with the Plan B product One-Step, there is a generic equivalent called Next Choice available without a prescription. Side effects of both products include abdominal pain, fatigue, headache and nausea.

The current study was funded by government and private grants, and the researchers report no financial conflicts of interest.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110427/hl_nm/us_morning_pill_1

New Pakistani law creates third gender category

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on Monday directed the National Database and Registration Authority (Nadra) not to indulge in ‘gender’ verification of eunuchs by a medical board and amend its laws to declare transgender as she-male.

A three-member bench of the apex court comprising Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Muhammad Sair Ali and Justice Ghulam Rabbani also directed Nadra to amend the law to include eunuchs in the gender column of the identification records. The court asked all the provincial governments to protect the fundamental rights of eunuchs and also take steps for giving them inheritance rights.

The court directed Nadra to expedite efforts for issuance of National Identity Cards (NICs) to eunuchs, besides registering them as she-males. The court observed that eunuchs are Pakistani citizens, but they are deprived of various rights, including the right of having NICs.

During the hearing, all the provincial governments submitted their reports about their steps for the welfare of eunuchs. The court was informed that the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh governments had appointed focal person of eunuchs to represent them and coordinate issues/cases between eunuchs and administrative departments properly. The court also directed the Punjab and Balochistan governments to appoint focal person as well.

The KPK government stated in its report that the Higher Education Department of the province would continue to impart higher education to all citizens, including eunuchs without any discrimination under the provisions of sub clauses (1) and (2) of Article 25 of the Constitution.

Dr Muhammad Aslam Khaki, the counsel for eunuchs, informed the court that Nadra was asking eunuchs for documentation to confirm their gender before issuance of NICs. The court asked the Manager Legal, Nadra, who was present in the courtroom, whether such documentation was also required to issue identity cards to men and women. The Nadra representative informed the court that an ordinance would soon be promulgated for registration and declaration of eunuchs as she-males. The chief justice said when eunuchs would be given their complete rights, their families would also own them. He warned that a stern action would be taken against those police officers who tried to harass eunuchs. Later, the hearing was adjourned for three weeks.

Nadra in December 2010 had agreed to add a third option under the gender category in identity card forms. It had said the applications forms for NICs would contain the third option of ‘Khawaja sara’ (transgender) along with ‘male’ and ‘female’.

Talking to newsmen after the hearing, the president of the She-male Association of Pakistan, Almas Boby, expressed gratitude to the court for granting the community their rights.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=43662&Cat=2&dt=4/26/2011

Topless dance in public triggers Thai furore

BANGKOK: To millions of tourists, the Thai capital is known for its tolerance and wild nightlife.

But a national uproar over several girls who danced topless in public during raucous celebrations at the recently concluded Songkran water festival has underlined the limits of acceptable behaviour and the nuances of public morality.

The dancers were filmed gyrating to thumping music in the heart of Bangkok on Friday, and video of it circulated widely. One clip was seen by nearly 1 million people before it was removed.

Reports of the episode shot to the top of Thai news websites, and the police began an investigation. Suddenly, one of Asia’s most socially liberal societies showed a deeply conservative side.

”We will take legal action against them,” a police official, Major-General Suwat Jangyodsuk, said of the dancers. ”This has damaged a traditional Thai ceremony. The charge is doing a shameful act in public by indecently exposing oneself.”

The Minister of Culture, Nipit Intarasombut, demanded that ”society come out and criticise” the dancers, who he said should atone by reading books about traditional Thai celebrations to nursery school children.

Three girls aged 14, 15 and 16 turned themselves in on Monday. The police said they paid fines of 500 baht ($15.75) and were released. It was not clear whether their youth would help dissipate the surprisingly intense upset.

Thailand has rules against vice, and the government regularly blocks websites deemed to violate Thai values. But weak enforcement and a general laissez-faire ethos undermine such controls. The country has a long history of men frequenting prostitutes; Bangkok is home to hundreds of so-called saunas, where male clients do more than just soak in hot tubs.

Minutes from where the three dancers were filmed is the Patpong district, where women and men perform in sex shows and sex workers ply countless bars.

Chalidaporn Songsamphan, an associate professor at Thammasat University in Bangkok, said Thais were uncomfortable when sexuality was displayed in public, and the anger directed at the topless dancers was a way for people to channel their frustrations about wider social problems, like alcoholism, low student test scores and teenage delinquency.

”Thais need someone to blame,” she said. ”It’s easier than fixing problems.”

http://www.kiamaindependent.com.au/news/world/world/general/topless-dance-in-public-triggers-thai-furore/2139456.aspx

When women act like men: Ban on “pengkid” women

THREE years ago, the National Fatwa Council made a decision against women who dressed like men — pengkid — and denounced their behaviour as haram, even as it caused much anger and confusion among the public.

The fatwa, released by the council on Oct 23, 2008, read: “Pengkid, that is, women who have the appearance, mannerisms and sexual orientation similar to men is haram in Islam.

“We urge parents and the Muslim community to pay serious attention to this problem.

“Emphasis should be placed on teaching and guiding young girls, especially on their clothing, behaviour and appearance, so that this problem may be avoided because it runs counter to their fitrah and Allah’s way.”

(Fitrah is the innate natural sexual inclination each person is born with and which does not change. In Islam, if a person is born male, he is masculine and sexually attracted to women; if born a female, she is feminine and sexually attracted to men.)

The episode only came to an end, of sorts, when Department of Islamic Development (Jakim) director-general Datuk Wan Mohamed Sheikh Abd Aziz clarified that the fatwa was meant as an advisory to “arrest the social ill”, and not a law.

He defined pengkid as a married woman or maiden whose appearance or image was like that of a man.

While the fatwa includes the dressing of the person, it’s also about the way she behaves because “a woman may be dressed as a woman but her behaviour may be like a man”.

She may also have sexual desires for women.

Wan Mohamed denied that the fatwa labelled all pengkid as lesbians.

“It is hampir (close to) lesbianism. Hampir means she doesn’t do the act, but is heading that way.

“For instance, Islam forbids people from coming close to zina (adultery). That means, not only is the act forbidden but any act that may lead to the act is also forbidden.

“We are trying to save these women (from becoming lesbians). What would happen if we didn’t advise and save our people?

“If we allow this problem to continue, our Eastern culture will be no different from the Western one. Where will our religious values be?” he had said in an interview with the New Sunday Times then.

He pointed out that the gazetting of the fatwa was at the discretion of the states.

It is learnt that the fatwa has so far remained advisory in most states, except for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, where it has been gazetted into law and included in Section 34 of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993.

http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/39955-when-women-act-like-men

20 women stopped from leaving for Saudi Arabia

Twenty Madagascan women who planned to work as maids in Saudi Arabia, were intercepted by police yesterday before they were able to board the plane, the government said.
“We prevented these young girls from leaving because their paperwork wasn’t in order, notably they didn’t have contracts signed by the public service ministry,” Population Minister Nadine Ramaroson said.
In late January the government put in place a temporary ban on any domestic workers going to work abroad.
Since then only a tiny fraction of the requests submitted have been approved by the ministry, which examines them on a case-by-case basis.
The ban came in the wake of numerous cases of maids being abused, mostly in Lebanon, where at least 6,000 Madagscan women are in domestic employment, and more recently in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.
The 20 maids who were supposed to leave yesterday had been recruited by a Sri Lankan agency with a branch in Madagascar. They had signed up to work for two years in Riyadh or Jeddah.

http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=430041&version=1&template_id=39&parent_id=21

14-Year-Old Girl Faces Adultery Charges

A 14-year-old girl caught in a rooftop encounter with a 25-year-old man faces adultery charges in Ajman, United Arab Emirates, officials said.

The girl’s distraught father told Gulf News she was locked up for more than two weeks at the Ajman central jail with older women before being transferred to a juvenile center in Sharjah.

Normally people under 15 are considered victims in sex crimes. She will be tried on adultery charges later this month.

“The trial will start in spite of the age ceiling set for trials on sexual related crimes by the U.A.E. law,” a court source told Gulf News. “The law states that the minimum age of suspects in crimes related to sex must be 15 years. Such cases should be conducted in special juvenile courts. Otherwise, suspects are considered victims rather than suspects.”

The girl’s father said his ninth-grade daughter is a brilliant student.

“I did not inform the school about the incident,” the girl’s sobbing father said. “I did not tell her brothers … they believe that she went to stay with her aunt in Abu Dhabi for some time.”

The father said court officials refused to release his daughter on bail.

http://www.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=34210&catid=863

Oklahoma: Religious assault on women, abortion rights, continue

In Oklahoma the religious rights’s assault on women’s reproductive freedom continues. Wednesday Governor Mary Fallin signed two new lawsinto existence that further restrict a woman’s right to an abortion. The new laws make Oklahoma one of the most restrictive states in the nation.

House Bill 1888, “The Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” will force a woman to carry to term any pregnancy after 20 weeks, regardless of defects. Hence government will force women to carry to term a fetus that has no chance of life outside of the womb. For many such a measure is cruel and inhumane, an unnecessary and unwarranted barbarism inflicted on a woman already in pain.

The law also makes it a felony for doctors to perform abortions after 20 weeks and presumes a fetus can feel pain after 20 weeks, a presumption that has no basis in science. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has stated it knows of “no legitimate scientific information that supports the statement that a fetus experiences pain.”

In addition, the law makes no exception for cases of rape or incest.

The second law constitutes an economic assault on women’s reproductive freedom. The law prohibits standard insurance policies in the state from covering abortions. For many, such a measure is nothing but a means to punish and penalize women who dare exercise their constitutional rights.

http://www.examiner.com/humanist-in-national/oklahoma-religious-assault-on-women-abortion-rights-continue

Massage Parlor Bill Aims To Curb Pittsburgh ‘Sex Trafficking’

PITTSBURGH — City Councilman Doug Shields is introducing a bill to license massage parlor employees in an effort to prevent sex trafficking by women he says are “hidden away right under our noses” in Pittsburgh.”It’s a horrible story, it’s one that needs a response, and it needs the full cooperation of everybody,” Shields said Monday.A news conference was held with members of the Project to End Human Trafficking, a Pittsburgh-based group which said it has identified 15 massage parlors in the city and seven more in the suburbs that it believes are fronts for prostitution and, possibly, trafficking in young Asian women forced to have sex.Requiring a city license would force businesses to open their books to auditors and create a means for police to uncover any possible illegal activities, Shields said.

Along with licensing, the bill also includes a list of operational requirements for massage parlors.”The purpose of this ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and welfare by regulating massage establishments and massage practitioners. Through licensing and a list of operational requirements, this ordinance may prevent sex trafficking in persons and commercial sexual exploitation,” the ordinance paperwork says.The proposed legislation will be up for discussion at Wednesday’s City Council meeting.

http://www.wtae.com/r/27582708/detail.html

Haryana doctor held for sex determination test

Chandigarh, April 20 (IANS) A doctor and his assistant in Haryana’s Karnal town were caught red-handed Wednesday while they were conducting a test on a pregnant woman to determine the foetus’ gender.

A team of district authorities and health officials, led by Karnal Civil Surgeon Vandana Bhatia, caught Brij Bhushan, who runs the Karnal Ultrasound Centre, and his compounder Amit while conductingthen sex dtermionation test, whih is banned under law. Karnal town is some 120 km from here.

The team was accompanied by police officers.

The officials seized a China-made portable ultrasound machine and other equipments.

‘The woman, who had come there for the test, tried to run away by jumping over a wall. However, the members of the team caught her. The woman has been identified as Neelam, resident of Sampla Kheri in district Kaithal,’ a state government spokesman said here.

The woman has a one-and-a-half year old girl and was three months pregnant.

Earlier in February this year, the doctor’s clinic in another part of Karnal was sealed for carrying out sex determination tests.

Bhushan had then hired the new place in a residential area to carry out his illegal activities.

Haryana has the worst sex ratio among all states in India – 877 females per 1,000 males. The national sex ratio, as per Census 2011, is 940.

‘Action would be taken against the doctor and his compounder under the provisions of PNDT (Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques) Act,’ the spokesman added.

Sex determination tests are banned under the PNDT Act to check the practice of aborting female foetuses.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/haryana-doctor-held-sex-determination-test-123053316.html

Tennessee Senate moves constitutional measure on abortion closer to public vote

Abortion foes moved toward putting the issue up for a public referendum in Tennessee as the state Senate approved a constitutional amendment that would allow more restrictions on the practice.

Senators voted 24-8 Monday night to place an amendment on the ballot that would state explicitly that abortion is not protected by the Tennessee constitution, overturning a 2000 ruling that abortion opponents say has kept the state from placing more regulations on abortion.

If the legislation, SJR127, is approved by the House, it would go before voters in the 2014 elections.

All 20 Republicans in the Senate voted for the amendment. Four Democrats also voted for the amendment, including state Sen. Douglas Henry.

“This resolution is only about letting the people decide whether they want their elected representatives to make the laws on abortion,” said state Sen. Mae Beavers, R-Juliet, the amendment’s sponsor.

The Senate spent about half an hour debating the amendment, which has come up repeatedly since the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in 2000 that the state constitution offers greater protections for abortion than the U.S. constitution.

Much of that time was spent discussing a pair of changes suggested by Sen. Roy Herron, D-Dresden, that would have explicitly protected access to abortion for women whose lives are at risk or victims of rape or incest. In such cases, the decision whether to have an abortion ought to be left to the pregnant woman and her family, he said.

“We ought not let some future legislature prohibit that family from protecting those victims,” he said.

But Beavers said the changes were unnecessary because her amendment would not in itself ban abortion. She also said the changes would delay the amendment’s final passage, because state law says any change in the wording of the amendment would start the process of altering the constitution all over again.

The vote sends the amendment to the state House of Representatives, which will also have to approve the measure by a two-thirds majority for the issue to appear on 2014 ballot. If a majority of voters who cast ballots in that year’s race for governor approve the amendment, it would then be added to the state’s constitution.

Already, supporters and opponents are gearing up for a battle at the polls.

“Decisions regarding pregnancy are perhaps the most personal decisions a woman can make,” said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Tennessee chapter. “We are building a broad-based coalition … so that when voters go to the polls in 2014 they will vote for access to health care and privacy, and against SJR127.”

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110419/NEWS/304190030/Tennessee-moves-closer-abortion-vote-

Kansas enacts new abortion restrictions

TOPEKA, Kan., April 13 (UPI) — Women in Kansas face new restrictions on their right to have an abortion after 22 weeks of pregnancy as of July 1, pro-choice proponents say.

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed two measures into law Tuesday effectively ending late-term abortions in the state unless they are necessary to save the life of the mother, The Topeka (Kan.) Capital Journal reported.

Brownback said challenges to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling establishing a national right to abortion are popping up all over the country.

“You’re seeing pro-life legislation pass in many jurisdictions across the nation,” he said. “To sign major pro-life legislation in a first term, I think is important and significant.”

Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri and Trust Women of St. Louis said the legislation would have a negative impact on the health of women.

“These bills will not reduce the rate of abortion,’ said Julie Burkhart, executive director of Trust Women, “They will force women to seek other means.”

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/04/13/Kansas-enacts-new-abortion-restrictions/UPI-23451302700320/#ixzz1JQONdWEz

Transgendered teacher rejects settlement offer in firing case

A substitute teacher who says he was fired by a local Catholic school board for changing his gender is rejecting a settlement in order to continue speaking about the case.

Jan Buterman was born a woman but now lives full-time as a man. He claims he was fired in Oct. 2008 by Greater St. Albert Catholic Schools, four months after informing the deputy superintendent he was changing gender and wished to be identified as Mr. Buterman in the future.

The superintendent’s written response informed Buterman he would be removed from the substitute teacher list because “gender change is not aligned with the teachings of the Church” and would result in “confusions and complexity with students and parents as a model and witness to Catholic faith values.”

Buterman went to the Alberta Human Rights Commission, which accepted the complaint in Oct. 2009 on the grounds of medical disability, physical disability and gender. At the time, a spokeswoman for the commission said 60 per cent of cases heading to the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission are resolved through conciliation within a year, avoiding the extra step of a tribunal.

Last September, the school board offered Buterman $78,000 cash -approximately a teacher’s salary -along with a one-year teaching job in exchange for dropping the complaint. The settlement came with a confidentiality agreement which stipulated he could no longer talk about the complaint or refer to the incident.

Buterman didn’t want to give up talking about the case, since it involves documented proof of anecdotal experiences of many transgender people.

In the fall, Buterman began a master’s degree in education policies at the University of Alberta. The confidentiality clause would hamper his future work, including an upcoming presentation in May at an academic conference in Fredericton.

“As an academic and activist, the need to talk about this, I think, is pretty valid,” said Buterman. “I think it’s really important that we’re able to point to this and say it really happened, this is what was said.”

Buterman’s lawyers have advised him refusing the offer would result in the school board moving to dismiss the complaint because a “fair and reasonable” settlement has been put on the table.

The decision has more than monetary consequences, and likely means the end of the legal process. The Alberta Teachers’ Association confirmed it has been paying Buterman’s legal fees to date. However, a union spokesman says it is no longer paying Buterman’s legal fees based on an evaluation of the “likely outcome” of the case and recommendations from their lawyers.

“We believe this has gone as far as it can go; we’ve received the best possible return or result,” said Dennis Theobald. “We don’t believe we should necessarily be supporting, at least on a financial basis, Mr. Buterman going forward.”

Theobald said the decision is not based on the merits of the case itself, and does not reflect a change in the union’s policy of protecting its members on gender grounds.

Buterman says he hoped the case would be debated in a tribunal process and “gets it” that the lawyers evaluated the case. He doesn’t have the resources to keep fighting. “This will be the end of it. But it’s the end of it, and I can still talk about it. I can still be true to what happened.”

Representatives of Greater St. Albert Catholic Schools could not be reached for comment on Sunday.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/transgendered-teacher-rejects-settlement-offer-firing-case-20110410-170000-684.html

Transgender N.J. man sues over firing from job requiring men only

A transgender employee hired to oversee urine tests administered to men has filed a discrimination lawsuit against a Camden drug treatment center that fired him after it confronted him about his gender last summer.

El’Jai Devoureau, 39, said Urban Treatment Associates questioned him about his gender a day after he started working in the position, which had been open only to male candidates.

“Is El’Jai a male? The employer says no, and El’Jai says he is,” said Michael Silverman of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund in New York, which filed the lawsuit Friday. “He’s undergone hormone treatment and surgery.”

The case challenges an employer’s right to eliminate transgender candidates for positions that the law says may be gender-specific. Silverman said he was unaware of any previous transgender-discrimination case that addressed the issue.

When his employer asked about his gender after he began work, Devoureau responded, “I am a man, and I can do the job. They said, ‘You’re fired,’ ” he said during an interview Monday.

According to the lawsuit, Devoureau, of Gloucester County, was hired in June to observe men depositing urine in cups for drug analysis. The supervision is to assure that the sample is fresh and not from a different person.

The employer may require male workers for such a job, Silverman said.

In documents filed in January, after Devoureau filed a discrimination complaint with the state, the treatment center stated that it fired Devoureau because he was not a biological male. But it disputed that the termination was discriminatory.

“I’ve always lived as a male,” Devoureau said. He has identified as male since about age 5 and has undergone treatment to transition, he said.

In 2006, Devoureau completed the documents required to change his gender for Social Security and for his New Jersey driver’s license. Georgia also amended his birth certificate, he said.

After Devoureau began work, according to the lawsuit, an acquaintance recognized him and passed along to supervisors that Devoureau was physically female at birth and was transgender.

A day later, the lawsuit alleges, Devoureau was confronted by the program’s director, identified as Van Macaluso. She allegedly told Devoureau that he was fired because she had been told “he was not a man, that he did not have the parts of a man, and that the job called for a biological male,” according to legal documents.

Devoureau and his lawyer said they knew of no complaints about Devoureau’s job performance.

A person who answered the phone at Urban Treatment Associates said that Macaluso would not be in the office until next week and that no one else could comment. The attorney representing the center did not immediately return a call for comment.

Devoureau said Monday that he filed the lawsuit to prevent transgender discrimination in the future.

“What matters is not who I am, but how I do the job,” he said. “And I did that job perfectly.”

“New Jersey is a national leader in transgender equality, and New Jersey is a worldwide model in protecting transgender people from discrimination,” Steven Goldstein, chairman of the civil rights organization Garden State Equality, said Monday.

“We’ve never seen or heard of such a brazen disregard for the law,” he said.”

http://articles.philly.com/2011-04-11/news/29406634_1_transgender-legal-defense-discrimination-lawsuit-treatment-center

Idaho Rejects Rape Exception In Abortion Bill

Marching in step with the GOP’s nationwide war on a woman’s right to choose, the Idaho legislature gave final approval to a bill that would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks. Modeled after Nebraska’s first-in-the-nation measure, the bill — like the one passed in Kansas last week — is based on highly disputed medical research alleging that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks. Idaho’s bill, however, also fails to include exceptions for rape, incest, severe fetal abnormality or the mental or psychological health of the mother. “Only when the pregnancy threatens the mother’s life or physical health could a post-20-week abortion be performed.”

In 1990, Idaho’s anti-abortion Gov. Cecil Andrus (D) vetoed a similar bill expressly because it failed to provide a rape or incest exception. “The bill is drawn so narrowly that it would punitively and without compassion further harm an Idaho woman who may find herself in the horrible, unthinkable position of confronting a pregnancy that resulted from rape or incest,” he said.

But this year during Sexual Assault Awareness Month, state Republican lawmakers found plenty of reasons to advocate for it. State Rep. Shannon McMillan (R) argued that women who were impregnated under “violent circumstances” should have no choice because it’s not the fetus’s fault. State Rep. Brent Crane, the bill’s sponsor, took it a step further. Believing that “tragic, horrific” acts of rape or incest are the “hand of the Almighty,” Crane said women should trust God to turn the consequences of their sexual assault into “wonderful examples”:

“Is not the child of that rape or incest also a victim?” asked Rep. Shannon McMillan, R-Silverton. “It didn’t ask to be here. It was here under violent circumstances perhaps, but that was through no fault of its own.”[...]

The Idaho bill’s House sponsor, state Rep. Brent Crane, R-Nampa, told legislators that the “hand of the Almighty” was at work. “His ways are higher than our ways,” Crane said. “He has the ability to take difficult, tragic, horrific circumstances and then turn them into wonderful examples.”

Crane’s belief that good can come from such horrific circumstances may be one shared or embraced by a sexual assault victim. However, that interpretation, that belief, that choice should be made by the woman — not forced upon her by law. The right to choose is not about the “innocence” or “guilt” of the fetus – or of the woman for that matter. It is about a woman being able to decide whether she is willing and able to carry a pregnancy to term.

The bill does more than compel sexual assault victims to carry pregnancies to term, it makes it a felony to perform such an abortion and allows spouses and relatives to file legal injunctions against physicians who break the ban. The bill also sets up a fund that can accept donations to defend the bill — a needed provision since the Idaho attorney general has issued two legal opinions declaring the bill unconstitutional for violating the Roe v. Wade decision’s viability standard.

Despite the lack of constitutionality or compassion, the bill passed 54 to 14 with only one Republican joining all 13 Democrats in opposition. The bill now heads to Gov. Butch Otter (R) “who is expected to sign it.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/idaho-almighty-abortion/