Reproductive Health Policies in President Bush's Second Term: Old Battles and New Fronts in the United States and Internationally

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 405-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah R Mcfarlane
2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Populist radical right (PRR) parties have been steadily expanding, not only in the number of supporters they gain and the seats they win in governments, but more importantly they have been increasingly elected into governmental coalitions as well as presidential offices. With the prominence of these authoritarian, nationalistic and populist parties, it is often difficult to discern what kind of policies they actually stand for. Particularly with regards to the welfare state and public health, it is not always clear what these parties stand for. At times they call for a reduction of health-related welfare provision, despite the fact that this goes against the will of the “ordinary people”, their core supporters; they often promote radical reductions of welfare benefits among socially excluded groups - usually immigrants, whom are most in need of such services; and finally they often mobilize against evidence-based policies. The purpose of this workshop is to present the PRRs actual involvement in health care and health policies across various countries. As PRR parties increase and develop within but also outside of the European continent it is necessary to keep track of their impact, particularly with regards to health and social policies. Although research surrounding PRR parties has significantly expanded over the last years, their impact on the welfare state and more specifically health policies still remains sparse. This workshop will present findings from the first comprehensive book connecting populist radical right parties with actual health and social policy effects in Europe (Eastern and Western) as well as in the United States. This workshop presents five country cases (Austria, Poland, the Netherlands, the United States) from the book Populist Radical Right and Health: National Policies and Global Trends. All five presentations will address PRR parties or leaders and their influence on health, asking the questions “How influential are PRR parties or leaders when it comes to health policy?” “Do the PRR actually have an impact on policy outcomes?” and “What is the actual impact of the health policies implemented by PRR parties or leaders?” After these five presentations, the participants of the workshop will be engaged in an interactive discussion. Key messages As the number of PRR parties increase worldwide and their involvement in national governments become inevitable, new light must be shed on the impact these political parties have on public health. Politics needs to become better integrated into public health research. The rise of PRR parties in Europe might have serious consequences for public health and needs to be further explored.


2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (11) ◽  
pp. 864-869 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia H. Koumans ◽  
Maya Sternberg ◽  
Carol Bruce ◽  
Geraldine McQuillan ◽  
Juliette Kendrick ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-159
Author(s):  
Jeanie Whitten-Andrews

In the midst of extreme and dualistic religio-political debates regarding women’s sexual wellness and abortion, one begins to wonder what a new theo-ethical approach might look like which rejects overly-simplistic, harmful understandings of such crucial issues. What might it look like to truly centre women’s full human experiences, loving each other in a way that addresses harm and meets tangible needs? This article examines the complex inequitable structural and institutional realities of sexual wellness and abortion through an intersectional theo-ethical lens. The article then proceeds to suggest a new socio-religio-political ‘Pro-Love’ philosophy, undergirded by foundational theological understandings of justice-oriented love, and situated within the broad fields of Feminist, Liberation, Process, and Queer Theologies, within the Christian tradition. The suggested approach requires systematically addressing root issues affecting the lack of equitable access to sexual wellness and the racist/sexist/classist structures forcing women into under-resourced and unsafe environments, leading to high demand for abortion services.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-52
Author(s):  
Haleigh R Williams

Abstract Historically, female patienthood has been defined by an expectation of passivity and the concession of bodily autonomy. After Birth by Elisa Albert (2015) and Eleven Hours by Pamela Erens (2016) shed light on the status of the modern female patient through the lens of her treatment throughout the process of childbirth in a clinical setting. The increasing medicalization of pregnancy and childbirth in the United States has added a compelling layer to the existing tension between women and the institution of medicine. Positioning these texts in conversation with the treatment of women at the hands of healthcare workers allows us to contextualize the fictional narratives, which themselves offer a dialectal framework to facilitate our understanding of female patienthood.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyssa F. Harlow ◽  
Amy Zheng ◽  
John Nordberg ◽  
Elizabeth E. Hatch ◽  
Sam Ransbotham ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although fertility is a couple-based outcome, fertility studies typically include far fewer males than females. We know little about which factors facilitate or inhibit male participation in fertility research. In this study we aimed to explore factors that influence male participation in fertility research among North American couples trying to conceive. Methods We conducted a qualitative research study of male participation in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a prospective preconception cohort of couples actively trying to conceive in Canada and the United States. Between January–August 2019, we carried out 14 online one-on-one in-depth interviews and one online focus group of males and females with varying levels of participation. The in-depth interviews included females who enrolled in PRESTO but declined to invite their male partners to participate (n = 4), males who enrolled in PRESTO (n = 6), and males who declined to participate in PRESTO (n = 4). The focus group included 10 males who enrolled in PRESTO. We analyzed the transcriptions using inductive content analysis. Results Male and female participants perceived that fertility is a women’s health issue and is a difficult topic for men to discuss. Men expressed fears of infertility tied to masculinity. However, men were motivated to participate in fertility research to support their partners, provide data that could help others, and to learn more about their own reproductive health. Conclusions Male participation in fertility studies will improve our understanding of male factors contributing to fertility and reproductive health issues. Results indicate a need for more education and health communication on male fertility to normalize male participation in fertility and reproductive health research. Plain English Summary Men are much less likely than women to participate in research on fertility and pregnancy. However, it is important for men to participate in fertility research so that we gain a better understanding of male factors that impact fertility and pregnancy outcomes. In this qualitative study, we interviewed men and women from Canada and the United States who were trying to become pregnant to understand why men choose to participate in fertility research, why men choose not to participate in fertility research, and why women choose not to invite their male partners to participate in fertility research. We found that both men and women believe fertility is a woman’s health issue. Men find it difficult to talk about pregnancy and fertility and have fears of infertility tied to masculinity. However, men are motivated to participate in fertility research to support their partners, to help others, and to learn more about their own reproductive health.


Author(s):  
Girvin Liggans ◽  
Marc S. Boyer ◽  
Veronica S. Moore ◽  
Laurie B. Williams

Preventing ill food employees from spreading pathogens to food and food contact surfaces remain an important objective of retail food safety policy in the United States. Since 2005, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recommended food establishments implement employee health policies that include requirements for the exclusion or restriction of ill food employees and reporting, to the person in charge, symptoms or diagnosis of certain diseases transmitted by food. The incorporation of this recommendation, however, has not been widely studied. The purpose of this exploratory study was to assess the presence and prevalence of employee health policies at fast food and full-service restaurants in the United States. More than 50% of fast food and full-service restaurants were found to have non-existent employee health policies for each of the five recommended components specified in the FDA Food Code. Results showed 17.41% of fast food and 12.88% of full-service restaurants had all five recommended components. Moreover, most restaurants with all five recommended employee health policy components were part of a multiple-unit operation and found to have more developed food safety management systems than restaurants with none of the recommended components. Further attention and research into the impediments associated with developing and implementing employee health policies in restaurants is warranted.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-133
Author(s):  
Debbie Fraser

IN CELEBRATION OF NATIONAL NURSES WEEK THE ANA AND professional nursing organizations across the United States have come together to address an issue critical to our future—building an even more powerful nursing profession that can take the lead on addressing the complexities of patient care, reshaping the work environment, and influencing health policies to benefit patients and their families. This critical message is being carried to all nurses through each organization’s professional publications.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document