A look at VAWA/ Post #5

On February 28th, The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) finally received approval after disagreement on provisions of the revised version. After the Senate initially passed the legislation, House Republicans presented an alternative version that sparked critique from Democrats and women activism groups. The revised proposal excluded protection for gay, bisexual, and transgender victims of abuse. Furthermore, the alternative legislature removed sexual orientation and gender identity from groups that are facing obstacles to obtain victim aid. A final provision would allow a non-Native American man accused of abuse on a reservation by a Native American woman the possibility to take their case to federal court. (Yeah, that one was a little confusing.) The revised legislation, a contentious issue even between Republicans, failed to pass. Renewing the act will benefit law enforcement of local communities and aid physical and sexual abuse centers. 

Although the legislation passed, it is a shame that this issue became another battleground for the Republican and Democrat parties. The VAWA truly benefits our communities, and the fact that our party system could not reach bipartisanship is truly disconcerting. Everyone deserves basic human rights, yet because of certain party affiliations, the Republicans tried to leave out certain groups. On that note, why wasn’t everyone included? Why can’t this legislation also benefit men who are victims of physical or sexual abuse? 

Oh, by the way, here is a little history of this landmark legislation. First enacted in 1994, the VAWA improved the criminal justice system regarding violence and offered services to women impacted by violence. Federal punishment for repeat sex offenders has increased, and past sexual conduct of a victim is not allowed to be shared in trial (known as a rape shield.) No victim should be mandated to pay for their own rape examination or for service of a protection order. This protection order shall be enforced everywhere in the United States. More resources have been dedicated to domestic violence units of law enforcement. Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges are trained to understand and respond to domestic and sexual violence. Finally the law has provisions for Native American women that give them more protection from domestic violence.

So far so good, right? There are invaluable benefits that come with the VAWA. For one, federal penalties have been strengthened in a way that will hold rapists accountable for their crimes. So, too, does it mandate that rape victims don’t have to pay for their own rape exams—regardless of their income. The VAWA funds train over 500,000 law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and judges to teach them to better understand crisis calls and understand the realities of sexual violence. But…there’s the one dreaded word…FUNDS.

While it is true that the VAWA has won the fight, it is not the only fight the program will face. While the VAWA authorizes another $660 million in annual funding, the funding must be fought for separately. This is because the programs are subject to sequester which, in simplest terms, means that the funding could be put on the chopping block. Loss of such funds would result in 112,190 fewer victims having access to domestic violence programs and shelters, along with 64,000 fewer having assistance in getting anything from protection orders to counseling.

I don’t know about you, but I can’t see the justice in passing the VAWA but potentially cutting the funding. How is a program that is designed around providing education, protection, and support for innocent people subject to having such a significant amount of funding cut? Would the VAWA be able to effectively function in other ways if the funding actually gets cut?

-Katherine S.

Sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/01/the-violence-against-women-act-out-of-the-fire-into-the-sequester/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/vawa_factsheet.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/politics/congress-passes-reauthorization-of-violence-against-women-act.html?pagewanted=all

Picture:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/01/Take_Back_the_Night_0ef84-1647.jpg

Disabled? Denied/Blog Post #4

“Disabled” is a very versatile label that can encompass a wide range of people: anyone who is confined to a wheelchair to someone diagnosed with Down’s syndrome. Some estimates predict that 660 million people throughout the world cope with a disability that interferes with everyday life (Fact Sheet: HIV/AIDS and Disability, 2011). Despite the enormous number of individuals who have their own unique characteristics and qualities, people who acquire such a vague status have a long and controversial history of interference with and denial of their sexual rights.

Much of the prejudice the disabled face has roots in the United States’ movement for eugenics, led in particular by the state of California. Across the United States, legislation mandated those deemed a “burden to society” to be sterilized against their will to create a more ideal population. Chillingly, many states did not repeal the legislation until the 1960’s and 1970’s. By then, nearly 60,000 U.S. inhabitants had been sterilized (Kaelber, 2012).

Impressed by the eugenics movement and sterilization programs throughout the United States, the German National Socialist Party implemented their own program, that, in a span of 11 years, sterilized about 350,000 disabled people (Kaelber, 2012). The Nazi sterilization program was but one of the precursors to the Holocaust that claimed millions of lives.

Nearly 50 years after sterilization programs in the United States were eradicated, the struggle for disabled people’s sexual rights is not quite over.

Several erroneous assumptions based largely upon people’s ignorance leave the disabled at a disadvantage. First, many incorrectly relate having a disability with being asexual. Others simply don’t understand the mechanics of how the physically disadvantaged could participate in sexual behavior. At an AIDS conference, a HIV positive man in a wheelchair was once asked: “’How did you get it? He said, ‘Sexually.’ She looked at [him] up and down and said, ‘But how?” (Schleifer & Knight, 2012). Still more people strongly believe the disabled lack the mental capacity to give proper consent to sexual activities, and, like those in the eugenics movement, believe the disabled should not be permitted to reproduce.

Contrary to popular notions, a disability does not mean the end of one’s sexuality. However, a disability does have an immense impact on one’s sexual life. McCabe & Taleporos (2003) found in a study of men and women with physical disabilities that the more severe the physical disability, the more negatively the disability impacts sexual esteem and sexual satisfaction. A decrease in sexual esteem and satisfaction should not, however, be mistaken for a lack of sexual desire. Even men and women with spinal cord injuries may still be capable of sexual and physiological arousal, and some even experience ejaculation and orgasm (Kaelber, 2012).

Misguided assumptions and beliefs regarding the sexuality of those with disabilities often directly impact a disabled person’s access to education and interfere with his or her sexuality. Particularly in developing countries, those with physical handicaps are often denied an education simply because schools are not capable of meeting handicapped needs. In 2007, the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) estimated that out of 72 million children not attending school, a third did not attend because of a disability (Disability and HIV Policy Brief, 2009). Those that do make their way into the education system, even in developed countries, often never make it into a sexual education program (Schleifer & Knight, 2012). Many severely disabled people cannot easily be taught. “It may be difficult or impossible to teach more severely affected people how to engage in safe sexual behaviors,”  (Yarber & Sayad, 2013). At the end of the day, the disabled are often left in the dark, struggling with their emerging sexuality but lacking the education to do so in an informed, safe manner.

The HIV epidemic’s hold on those with disabilities served as a wakeup call. Even though people with disabilities were previously considered at low risk due to their assumed lack of sexual activity, HIV has considerably affected the disabled people as a whole. Although there has not been extensive research on the prevalence of HIV in the disabled, the studies that have been done indicate the HIV infection rate is as equally high or higher than the rate in the general population (Disability and HIV Policy Brief, 2009). Many HIV positive people with disabilities were simply unaware of the consequences of risky sexual behavior because of flawed educational systems. Others, especially those in the deaf community, had and continue to have difficulty communicating with health care professionals about their sexual health (Schleifer & Knight, 2012).

Living with a disability is difficult enough. The general population’s ignorance and attitudes towards those with a variety of disabilities has a particular tendency to compound the issue and often negatively impacts the sexual health of those with disabilities. If progress is to be made towards a greater sexual health for all and the disabled educated, we, the general population, are going to need to be educated first.

-Elie P.

References:

Disability and HIV Policy Brief. (2009, April). Retrieved from World Health Organization: http://www.who.int/disabilities/jc1632_policy_brief_disability_en.pdf

Fact Sheet: HIV/AIDS and Disability. (2011, June 8). Retrieved from Human Rights Watch: http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/06/08/fact-sheet-hivaids-and-disability

Kaelber, L. (2012). Eugenics: Compulsory Sterilization in 50 American States. Retrieved from Presentation about "eugenic sterilizations" in comparitive perspective : http://www.uvm.edu/~lkaelber/eugenics/

Schleifer, R., & Knight, K. (2012, December 1). The disabled often are denied information about sex and HIV. Retrieved from Human Rights Watch: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/12/01/disabled-often-are-denied-information-about-sex-and-hiv

Yarber, W. L., & Sayad, B. W. (2013). Human Sexuality: Diversity in contemporary America. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Healthcare Equality for the Transgender Population/Blog Post #3

           Very recently, the state of Oregon has passed a law saying that by October 1, 2014, the Oregon Health Plan (OHP) will have to provide equal benefits for transgender Oregonians. This includes mental healthcare, hormone treatments, and evaluations. Transgender people will have the same benefits (and restrictions) as non-transgender individuals of the same identifying gender.

The new law, the first of its kind, establishes the following mandates, as outlined by the Basic Rights Oregon Organization:

·      Health insurers may not categorically exclude transgender patients from coverage.

·      Health insurers must provide coverage and cannot deny coverage of treatments for transgender policy holders if the same treatments are covered for other policy holders.

·      Health insurers may not deny treatment on the basis of a policy holder’s actual or perceived gender. That means that all policy holders can rely on annual exams, cancer screenings, and gender-specific health care, regardless of their gender on file.

·      The statewide mandate for coverage of mental health services must apply to transgender patients.

While Oregon is the first state in the U.S. to pass a law like this, there are a few other instances in which transgender people have been guaranteed nondiscriminatory healthcare. For example, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has a nondiscriminatory clause based on gender identity. However this only protects transgender people against denial of coverage and disparities in rates. It does not require insurance companies to provide transition-related services. In July 2012, San Francisco moved to provide transition-related services to Healthy San Francisco, a healthcare program for uninsured residents. Unfortunately, implementation of this law has been slow.

            Puberty-suppressing treatments will also be made more accessible, which is crucial for many people’s transitions. For transgender youth in particular, puberty is a dreaded event with a timestamp attached. Pre-pubescent youth questioning their gender identity usually want to stage off puberty for the time being so they can figure things out before their bodies begin to change. Once they begin puberty, it is much more difficult to physically transition (but not completely impossible). Because of this, many questioning youth choose to begin puberty-blocking hormones, which simultaneously buy the adolescents time and also “spare the young teenagers the angst of developing secondary sex characteristics that feel terribly wrong to them” (Padawer). Counseling can also be critical for helping people make sense of their feelings before making a decision. Both of these resources will be available to transgendered people in Oregon under this law.

            Here is a photo of a woman’s transition with the help of hormone treatment. As you can see, hormone treatments drastically affect a person’s appearance, and help them become the person they want to be.

This monumental decision has personal significance for my family and me. My sister is a trans-female, meaning she has transitioned from male to female. She always remembers feeling a disconnect between how society perceived her (as male) and how she perceived herself (as female). For Lark, her transition has been about correlating her external identity with the internal identity she has always held. Since “coming out,” she has faced seemingly insurmountable discrimination and hate from others, including from the U.S.’s healthcare system. Before she saved up enough money to change her name and gender on her driver’s license, she had trouble at doctors’ offices. Furthermore, she has to pay a large monthly fee for hormone treatments. These medications are just birth control, which I get free through insurance every month because I am anatomically female. Yet the treatments my sister so desperately wants in order to become who she is has to be factored into her monthly budget. This is the very definition of discrimination. So why is it just now being (very slowly) addressed?

            I would argue that transgender people have a harder time being accepted by society than others in the LGBTQIA community. Would you agree? Why?

            Furthermore, I should add a disclaimer that I am a huge advocate for a universal healthcare system in the U.S. Is there anyone who does not believe in universal healthcare? And if you don’t, do you think that transgender people deserve these benefits, or do you think the way it is now (in most states) is nondiscriminatory? I would really enjoy your insights if you don’t mind sharing!

-Grace M. 

Sources:

http://www.basicrights.org/featured/historic-news-oregon-removes-barriers-to-transition-related-care/

http://www.basicrights.org/uncategorized/oregon-health-plan-to-cover-treatments-for-trans-children-starting-2014/

http://www.opb.org/thinkoutloud/shows/oregon-bans-transgender-health-care-discrimination/

http://www.sfprideatwork.org/general/local-and-national-trans-healthcare-victories/

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/magazine/whats-so-bad-about-a-boy-who-wants-to-wear-a-dress.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://longhornbambam.tumblr.com/post/30075065222/estrogen-is-a-hell-of-a-drug-imgur

Sex Education and Legal Matters/Blog Post #2

Sex education is currently one of the most fired-up issues in the United States.  There’s a seemingly endless spectrum of opinions on the best way to approach the matter: from what variance from what appropriate age (if any) should a ‘sex talk’ be given, to the battle between comprehensive and abstinent-only education (and the fluctuation between the groups), there’s a lot to discuss.

At the moment, 22 states (and the District of Columbia) require any sex education and 33 states (and DC) require HIV education.  In 35 states, parents may opt their children out of the program instated by their school. (1)

The state of North Dakota, however, has come to light in its sex education policies in a recent affair with North Dakota State University.  Two professors from NDSU received a competitive grant for $1.2 million last September to launch a three-year comprehensive sex education program for the Fargo area.  (2) However, President Bresciani of NDSU has frozen the funds, allegedly because they may go against a law effective as of July 2012 that requires K-12 schools in the state to ensure any sexual health curriculum “includes instruction pertaining to the risks associated with adolescent sexual activity and the social, psychological, and physical health gains to be realized by abstaining from sexual activity before and outside marriage.”

The controversy stems from the program's ties to Planned Parenthood and is thought that there could be a breach in the law.  According to the professors, though, the funds do not conflict with the law because it was to be taught outside of the schools and only to those teens who voluntarily agreed to participate with parental consent. (2)

At the very least, this is an analogy to what the country is experiencing regarding the matter: the issue is split and no one can agree on what to make of it.  Furthermore, it is proof of great disagreement and a lack of consensus on what to do on the matter and demonstrates that sex education here still has a long way to go.  As we carry on with this issue, it is crucial to keep the facts presented in mind-- after all, it's the most vulnerable in our society that will be impacted by the decisions made now and that will either grow or suffer as a result.

Sources:
1) https://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_SE.pdf

2) http://www.jamestownsun.com/event/article/id/177766/

India and Sex in the News/Blog Post #1

On December 16th, 2012, an Indian woman was viciously raped on a moving bus. The woman died shortly after at a hospital in Singapore. Following the appalling gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman in India, there has been uprising and protests in response to the incident. The incident, which occurred in December, is one of 24,000 rapes that are reported each year in India. The protests and uprisings reflect a cultural movement toward a more liberal society that is working to eliminate the stigma and shame attached to Indian women who have been raped. It is important to realize that the issue of rape in India have been a problem for quite some time in the country. There is no question that the report of rapes has increased; however the global media attention is adding flames to the fire. In Indian media, rapes are commonly reported and publicized, yet have not been picked up on a world platform to the extent of their coverage today.

Why has this become a global issue? The recent political uprise and frustration with a corrupt government could be to blame for this new found media attention. As the country pushes its boundaries towards a more liberal society, tension between progressive thinkers and traditionalists increases. The infamous December 16th assault and court trial has brought the penal code for such charges on to a political scale. Ranjana Kumari, director of the Center for Social Research in New Delhi explains this issue was put, “on the political agenda, which has never, ever happened before this.”

The recent coverage of the rapes in India poses a question: What would be the reaction if an American woman was raped in India? Chances are, the episode would explode into an enormous global issue. This could be for many reasons. However, most prominent is the clash of two cultures-- one having historical proof of devaluing other races in comparison to white people. Yes, there are racial undertones. However, the fact of the matter is we as Americans are separated by more than just bodies of water to the Indian population—we are separated by values. In the United States, for example, self expression (i.e. acting passionately for those we care about) is a form of communication. In India, expression is not nearly as common. This difference is most likely due a combination of gender roles and social conditioning. The bottom line, though, is that while these rapes are nothing less than tragic, the December 16th rape has not been in vain. It has led to a unification of victims in India and is allowing the people to finally gain a louder voice.

The recent increase in reporting of rapes in India has galvanized into protests and political uprising. This has positively affected women as they have used this as a tool to find their voice against sexual violence. The once taboo topic has made its way to the forefront of Indian political agenda, and it’s not going away any time soon.

-Bonita H.

Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/baroness-mary-goudie/sexual-violence-in-india-education-the-solution_b_2447378.html
http://world.time.com/2013/01/14/sexual-violence-in-india-how-long-will-the-medias-interest-last/