South Carolina Voters Press the Candidates on Reproductive Health Rights

COLUMBIA, S.C., Jan. 18, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- The Republican presidential primary is just days away and South Carolina voters are questioning the candidates about mounting legislation across the country and at their own Statehouse that puts basic individual rights at risk. At the forefront is a person's right to make decisions about their own health and the health of their families. Advocates point to a long-gathering movement to take away access to birth control, in-vitro fertilization (IVF), emergency contraception, and even undermine the standard of care established with the Hippocratic Oath.

During the last three legislative sessions, 41 ideologically motivated bills related to women's reproductive health were introduced in the South Carolina General Assembly. This follows attempts in other states to restrict health rights. Currently, 13 states allow some health care providers to refuse to provide services related to contraception; 18 states allow some health care providers to refuse to provide sterilization services; and a recent ballot initiative in Mississippi sought to ban many forms of birth control and assisted reproduction like in-vitro fertilization.

And yet, the current line-up of Republican candidates refuses to acknowledge this alarming trend. The issue of contraception was shunned during the recent New Hampshire debates. When asked if the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn a 1965 ruling that a constitutional right to privacy bars states from banning contraception, Mitt Romney responded that no states were trying to outlaw birth control. In fact, every year for the past 10 years, legislation has been introduced in South Carolina to do just that.

"It is counter-intuitive for any candidate to be in favor of reducing the number of poor families on welfare while being against family planning and birth control," said Bonnie Adams, Executive Director of the New Morning Foundation. "The candidates don't want the voters to know that undermining reproductive rights is a cornerstone of their agenda."

This very week South Carolina lawmakers will debate the "Freedom of Conscience Act." This controversial legislation would allow health care professionals and institutions to use their personal ideology as a reason to deny patients information and services. For example, a pharmacist could legally refuse to fill any prescription (including birth control, HIV medications, and even cancer medications) based on personal values versus what is in the best interest of the patient. Or consider a doctor who could legally withhold information about certain treatment options based on his own moral judgments.

"The candidates need to know that these are real-life scenarios that could impact the daily lives of our citizens," said Emma Davidson, Program Manager for the e-advocacy network Tell Them. "It's time to restore balance to these important conversations by calling for a mainstream approach."

The long-term implications for South Carolina are significant. It faces some frightening statistics when it comes to reproductive health. South Carolina consistently ranks among the top ten states for the highest rates of Gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and HIV/AIDS. Also, according to a 2011 Guttmacher Institute study, there were 52,000 unintended pregnancies in South Carolina among women aged 15-44. The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy reports that births to teenage mothers cost South Carolina taxpayers approximately $197 million annually.

About New Morning Foundation

New Morning Foundation is a non-partisan organization that represents a mainstream voice dedicated to creating a stronger, healthier South Carolina. This can be accomplished with sound public policies and programs that support medically accurate reproductive health education and access to clinical services. For information, please visit www.newmorningfoundation.org

SOURCE New Morning Foundation