Popular Articles

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Virginia Abortion Ban
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in a 6-5 decision on Wednesday upheld Virginia"s 2003 law banning what abortion-rights opponents call "partial-birth" abortion, a procedure known medically as intact dilation and extraction, the AP/Hartford Courant reports (O"Dell, AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). In 2005, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled 2-1 to strike down the Virginia law on the grounds that it does not include adequate exceptions to protect a woman"s health. The U.S. Supreme Court two years ago ordered the appeals court to revisit the issue when it upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, a federal law similar to the Virginia law (White, Washington Post, 6/25). The three-judge appeals panel again struck down the law in 2008 (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). The Virginia law permits women to choose various abortion procedures but makes it a crime for providers to perform an intact dilation and extraction, which involves crushing a fetus" skull to ease removal (Washington Post, 6/25). Abortion-rights supporters said that the Virginia law is unconstitutional because its broad definition of intact dilation and extraction could also prohibit standard dilation and extraction, the more common form of second-trimester abortion. Violations of the law would be considered a felony and punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The case is Richmond Medical Center v. Herring (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/24). William Fitzhugh, the Richmond doctor who challenged the Virginia law, said that the banned procedure is necessary to protect the life of the woman in some cases and that the law could prevent abortion providers from performing legal procedures out of fear of prosecution. Stephanie Toti, a Center for Reproductive Rights attorney who represented the plaintiffs, said that the Virginia law is broader than federal law because it punishes abortion providers who accidentally violate the law while performing legal abortion procedures. Judge"s Opinions Judge Paul Niemeyer in the majority opinion wrote that Virginia law protects physicians who are taking needed steps to save a patient"s life and should prevent "a Morton"s fork, where the doctor must choose between criminal liability or care that the doctor believes is not in the best interest of the patient." He added that the circumstances in which doctors could face criminal liability are so limited that they should not invalidate the law in every other case. Judge Blane Michael wrote in the dissenting opinion that the law will create a "real fear of criminal liability" among physicians because it will have the effect of criminalizing the actions of those who seek to perform legal procedures but need to use the banned procedure in rare instances. Michael wrote that the law therefore "places an undue burden on a woman"s right to obtain a pre-viability second trimester abortion -- a constitutional right repeatedly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court" (Washington Post, 6/25).Next StepsToti said that no decision has been made on whether to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court"s 2007 decision on the federal law made it clear that abortion bans must include exceptions for the health of the woman, the AP/Hartford Courant reports. Toti said that the appeals court"s decision "just really ignores that precedent." She added, "It"s really insulting to women"s dignity that the court would put so little priority on protecting women"s health and well-being" (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/25). Toti also said, "It puts doctors in a really untenable position because it forces doctors to choose between taking all the steps necessary to protect their patients and committing a felony" (Washington Post, 6/25). Virginia Attorney General Bill Mims said, "While we anticipate that the U.S. Supreme Court may be asked to review the decision, I am confident that the Supreme Court ultimately will uphold the law" (AP/Hartford Courant, 6/25).
diet pills
WFP To Cut $3B From Programs Because Of Budget Shortfall, Executive Director Says
Low donation levels are causing the World Food Programme (WFP) to fall short of feeding the most critically hungry people in the world, and the agency "has so far received only $1.8 billion and has had to cut back rations and programs to the 108 million people it serves, said Josette Sheeran," WFP"s executive director, Reuters reports (Rampton, 7/29).
News of the day
Researchers Develop Game For HIV+ Youth
Researchers at The University of Texas School of Public Health have developed a game for HIV-positive youth, +CLICK, designed to reduce secondary transmission of the virus.
Nutrition

Segregation Decreases Access To Surgical Care For Minorities, Study Finds

New research published in the June issue of the Journal of the American College of Surgeons reveals that in counties with the highest levels of segregation, an increase in the African-American or Hispanic population was associated with a decrease in the availability and use of surgical services and an increase in the number of emergency room visits. This research supports prior studies that have shown that minority groups in the United States have comparatively poorer access to a range of health care services, often resulting in late diagnosis of illness and delayed treatment. African Americans are the most segregated racial group in the U.S. Studies have shown that segregated African-American communities have higher infant mortality rates, decreased access to appropriate cancer care and worse outcomes from organ transplantation than other racial groups experience. Both African Americans and Hispanics living in counties with a higher proportion of African-American population report that they experience difficulty obtaining health care as compared with African Americans living in counties with a smaller African-American population. Through the National Institutes of Health and Healthy People 2010, the federal government has set forth goals to explore, account for and minimize these disparities. However, despite these goals, improving access to health care continues to pose a considerable challenge to health policy makers in their attempts to establish equity in the provision of care. "In the most segregated counties, we found that an increase as small as one percent in the African-American or Hispanic population was associated with a significant decrease in the availability and utilization of surgical services, a difference that was not present in counties with the least segregation," said Awori J. Hayanga, MD, MPH, Administrative Chief Resident, Department of General Surgery, University of Michigan Health System. "We hope this report will guide budgetary decisions and incentives by health policy makers in their bid to close the racial health disparity gap and increase access to surgical health care across racial lines, particularly in the most segregated areas." A cross-sectional analysis was performed on data from the 2004 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Area Re File, a nationwide record of health care, economic and demographic data. Each of the 3,219 U.S. counties was categorized into one of three levels - most, moderately or least segregated - using the Isolation Index, a measure of the probability that a member of one minority group will come into contact with members of the same racial group. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to examine the association between access to surgical services and proportion of minority population with varying levels of segregation, adjusting for socioeconomic and health characteristics. Results showed that in the most segregated counties, each percentage point increase in Hispanic or African-American population was associated with a statistically significant decrease in outpatient surgery volume (p


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):