Center for Reproductive Rights Target of Anti-Abortion "Anthrax" Attack

The Center for Reproductive Rights was the target of an anthrax threat on November 8 along with more than 200 other pro-choice organizations.

The Center for Reproductive Rights received notice from the National Abortion Federation (NAF) that packages had been sent to abortion clinics and pro-choice organizations with NAF's return address. According to NAF, the packages contained a white powder, and an unknown number of them had letters signed by the anti-abortion terrorist group "the Army of God."

"Murder Threat"

"This is a direct murder threat," said Center for Reproductive Rights president Janet Benshoof in the New York Daily News following the attack.

The package sent to the Center for Reproductive Rights was not opened and New York Police Department was immediately notified and the package was taken from the New York office. The Center for Reproductive Rights office in Washington, DC also received a package that was believed to contain the same powder and threat, and it too was taken away by the authorities. Tests of the powder found in the packages tested negative for the presence of anthrax. The November 8 attacks came some three weeks after a number of abortion clinics had received similar threats of packages containing powder.

This was the first instance of the Center for Reproductive Rights being directly targeted since its founding in 1992.

Anti-Abortionist Clayton Waagner Claims Responsibility for Anthrax Threats

Clayton Waagner, an anti-abortion zealot who is listed on the F.B.I.'s most wanted list, claimed responsibility for the recent anthrax threats made against family planning clinics and said he planned to kill 42 family planning clinic workers, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Reportedly Waagner visited Neal Horsley, an antiabortion activist in Carrollton, Ga., whom Horsley said he had not previously met, at his home on Friday, November 23. Waagener then identified himself and told Horsley that he was responsible for sending the recent anthrax threats to family planning clinics via Federal Express. Horsley operates the "Christian Gallery," and several other anti-abortion web sites.

On November 29, U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that Waagner is the primary suspect in the mailing of anthrax threats to abortion providers and pro-choice organizations targeted in the last two months.

In February, Waagner escaped from a Clinton, Illinois, jail where he was being held on federal firearms and interstate theft charges. Waagner tied up Horsley with duct tape before leaving, "so that it took many long minutes before I could untie myself," Horsley reported. Police collected fingerprints and documents from Horsley's home and notified the FBI, according to the Pittsburgh newspaper.

Letter by Center for Reproductive Rights President on Anti-Abortion Terrorism Published by the New York Times

Extremists at Home

One of the markers for terrorism is the repression of women's rights in the name of extreme ideology. Whether it's the Taliban denying women their most basic freedoms, or the Army of God and other fanatics in the US bent on destroying women's right to abortion, alarming acts of violence can take hold. Though the circumstances are different, the sentiments are the same. And so must be our response.

At a time when more than 200 letters containing a powdery substance have been received by abortion providers, it is imperative that law enforcement increase its efforts to find those responsible for this organized, domestic terrorism. Once identified, they should be fully prosecuted under federal law.

Janet Benshoof President of the Center for Reproductive Rights November 2, 2001

Center for Reproductive Rights Report Demonstrates Unequal Application of Reproductive Rights in Latin America

A team of Center for Reproductive Rights attorneys traveled to Bogota, Colombia in mid November for the launch of "Cuerpo y Derecho: legislacion y jurisprudencia en America Latina," a ground breaking study of legislation and high court decisions concerning the rights of women in five Latin American countries. The study, some 2 years in the making, is one of the first

to critically analyze howcourts are interpreting and applying laws affecting Latin American women.

The study focuses on Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru and was written with the contributions of researchers in those countries. Its findings speak to the enormous progress that has taken place in the last few years in the area of women’s rights on the national and international levels. However, the gap between progressive legal norms on the books and their application by courts in these countries has been great.

"Reproductive autonomy continues to be systematically violated,"says Luisa Cabal, coordinator of the Latin American program at the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Women's bodies are still the war zone in which societal discrimination and the subordination of women are explicitly manifested."

Some 100 members of the press, the legal community, and activists attended the launch of "Cuerpo y Derecho" at the School of Law of the University of the Andes. Dr. Aldredo Fuentes, Dean of the School of Law at the University of the Andes, Dr. Manuel Jose Cepeda, a judge on the Colombian Constitutional Court, Dr. Giulia Tamayo, member of the Latin American and Caribbean Committee for the Defense of Women’s Rights or CLADEM, Cabal of the Center for Reproductive Rights and Dr. Julieta Lemaitre, a professor at the School of Law at the University of the Andes and co-editor of the report participated in a panel discussion at the launch of the study.

The Center for Reproductive Rights and the other contributors first discussed doing the study two years ago as part of an effort to fill a void in the research and understanding of how legislation in these countries was being interpreted by the courts and impacting women’s lives.

Contributors (From L to R): Dr. Julieta Lemaitre, co-editor and contributor for Colombia chapter, Isabel Vericat, contributor for Mexico chapter, Luisa Cabal of the Center for Reproductive Rights, a co-editor, Dr. María José Lubertino, contributor for the Argentina chapter, Kathy Hall Martinez of the Center for Reproductive Rights, Lidia Casas Becerra, contributor for Chile chapter, Giulia Tamayo, contributor for Peru chapter, and Monica Roa of the Center for Reproductive Rights, a co-editor.

The report analyzes trends in the following areas:

The autonomy of women and adolescents

In general, regional courts protect women who decide to have children, although often they regard women solely as mothers rather than as subjects of human rights. When a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy decides to terminate it, the legal system does not respect her right to make that decision. Abortion remains a criminal offense and the legality of emergency contraception as an approved and available post-coital method of contraception is uncertain. The courts view abortion as a criminal violation including in cases of rape, incest and fetal abnormality. In all of the countries studied, except Colombia, the courts have consistently violated the rights of pregnant adolescents by upholding their expulsion from school. They also have failed to sanction employers that subject female workers to pregnancy tests to retain or obtain employment.

Contraception

In September 2001, the Chilean Supreme Court declared emergency contraception unconstitutional for being an abortifacient, contradicting well established medical findings that it is acts as a contraceptive. In addition, while Peru’s Ombudsman, an office of the government that has the power to investigate government action and make recommendations, has documented cases of coercive sterilization by government healthcare providers. The courts have not provided judicial remedies in these cases. In Argentina, courts have upheld the legislative prohibition on sterilization.

Divorce and the sphere of the family

All over the region, the courts continue to promote gender stereotypes in spite of legislative reforms such as the elimination of penal codes for the exoneration of rapists who marry their victims, and the enactment of laws that give women access to courts for domestic violence. Researchers note that divorce is treated differently in each country. In Chile annulments provide an imperfect and inconsistent way around the illegality of divorce. In Peru, although divorce is legal, the courts sometimes refuse to grant it. For example, a Peruvian woman was found to have no grounds for divorce even though her husband had abandoned the home over 10 years earlier, and there had been no news of him in the intervening years.

Giving Life to a Book Beyond its Pages

Several days before the study’s official launch Kathy Hall Martinez the deputy director of the Center for Reproductive Rights' International Program, Cabal, and Monica Roa, a fellow with the Center for Reproductive Rights' international program, met with the other contributors to brainstorm on how to bring further life to the study. The ideas included doing similar events to launch the study in the other countries analyzed. Also, the team considered the possibility of conducting investigations into the abuses of women’s reproductive rights in these countries.

However, perhaps the greatest success of "Cuerpo y Derecho" is that it was a successful collaboration between women’s rights activists, law school professors and scholars in the region. The next step will be ensuring that the book is used in law school curricula and in the training of judges. Some of those who contributed to the book have already begun to integrate it into courses they teach at law schools in the region.

The list of contributors to "Cuerpo y Derecho" is available. If you are interested in purchasing a copy of "Cuerpo y Derecho" please email the communications department of the Center for Reproductive Rights at publications@reprorights.org. The book is written in Spanish.

Conservative Groups Emerging In East Central Europe to Push Anti-Choice Agenda

Conservative groups and right-wing members of government in a number of East Central European states are pushing for a rollback in the rights of women to abortion services, the teaching of sex education in schools and public funding of contraceptives, according to the Center for Reproductive Rights.

"The Catholic Church, international anti-choice groups, along with conservative politicians, are threatening women's reproductive rights and health, particularly in Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and Russia," says Christina Zampas, staff attorney in the Center for Reproductive Rights' international program and author of the publication "Trends in Reproductive Rights: East Central Europe."

She adds, "This emerging anti-choice movement is threatening to undermine the progress of reproductive rights for women in this region."

Zampas's briefing paper discusses the trends in reproductive rights in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, the Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

In recent years, both Poland and Hungary have restricted their abortion laws. In Hungary, a Constitutional Court review of the abortion law led to legislative restrictions requiring women seeking abortions to submit to anti-abortion counseling accompanied by a waiting period. Under current law in Poland, abortion is allowed only when the woman's life or health is endangered, the pregnancy resulted from an unlawful act, or in cases of fetal impairment.

The Catholic Church has played a major role in limiting access to legal abortion services in Poland. Polish law requires that abortions be performed in public hospitals, but because of pressure from the Church, hospital administrators and doctors routinely turn women away from these facilities.

Sex education in schools is also under assault in this region. The introduction of sex education into schools in Russia was halted after conservative groups in the lower house of Russia's parliament opposed the program. In the Czech and Slovak Republics, efforts to improve teacher training in sex education and to publish sex education textbooks have been slowed by the Catholic Church. These efforts continue as the United Nations program on AIDS announced in November that Eastern Europe is experiencing the fastest increase in the number of people infected with HIV in the world, with the 75,000 people in the Russian Federation being infected with HIV in 2001.

Economic crisis in the region following the fall of socialist regimes has led to cuts in funding by these states for reproductive health services. Russia cut a federally financed family planning program that supported 214 family planning centers in 85 administrative districts in 1998. The result has been that a number of regions in Russia have no federal funding for family planning and reproductive health services.

In Croatia and Latvia, state health insurance no longer covers contraceptives. In Poland, until 1998, eight brands of oral contraception were completely subsidized by the state budget, but then the government withdrew subsidies for five of these contraceptives.

"It is crucial to protect the right of women throughout East Central Europe to reproductive health services," says Zampas.

Severe Abortion Law in El Salvador Persecutes Women

The Center for Reproductive Rights released in November the English translation of its 2000 report entitled, "Persecuted: Political Process and Abortion Legislation in El Salvador - A Human Rights Analysis" that examines El Salvador's abortion law, one of the strictest in the world, and the circumstances surrounding its recent passage.

Abortion continues to be a significant issue throughout Latin America. Advocates are meeting the first weekend in December in Rio de Janeiro to discuss a regional strategy for the decriminalization of abortion and plans to safeguard against new restrictions like those recently imposed in El Salvador.

The report shows that a year and a half after El Salvador's new abortion law took effect in 1998, 69 cases involving illegal abortions had been brought before courts. Most involved poor, under-educated, young women who self-induced abortions by using clothes hangers, ingesting very high doses of birth control pills, antacids, caustic liquids or cytotec pills. In 23 of the cases, hospital personnel turned the women over to police after they arrived for medical treatment following incomplete abortions.

"The entire debate on abortion in El Salvador failed to consider the effect this legislation would have on women's lives," says Center for Reproductive Rights staff attorney Luisa Cabal. "By continuing to deny women their reproductive rights, women in El Salvador remain second-class citizens."

The law criminalizes abortion without exception, even to save the life of the pregnant woman or in cases of rape or incest. Abortion providers and women obtaining abortions face increased prison terms of up to 12 years. Legislators also amended El Salvador’s Constitution in January 1999 to protect the right to life from the moment of conception, further restricting women's reproductive rights.

The report denounces the role of the Catholic Church which influenced policymakers with such tactics as bussing Catholic schoolchildren to the capitol to stage anti-choice demonstrations. In addition, the media in El Salvador covered the pending legislation, but ignored the view of groups opposed to the anti-abortion measures.

"Persecuted" condemns the Salvadoran government for its willful violation of international human rights standards which protect a woman’s right to life, health, liberty and privacy, and makes strong recommendations for reform.

Facts about El Salvador:

• The maternal mortality rate in El Salvador is one of the highest in the region - 300/100,000 births (World Bank).

• 41.6% of Salvadoran women have their first child before the age of 20 (Salvadoran Ministry of Health).

You can read the report online in both Spanish and English.

Representatives From 20 Latin American Countries Meet to Discuss Unwanted Pregnancy

Laura Katzive, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, joined more than 250 public health experts, researchers and nongovernmental advocates from 20 Latin American nations in Cuernavaca, Mexico, for a conference about the public health implications of unwanted pregnancy and abortion in the region. The procedure is illegal or severely restricted in most countries in the predominantly Roman Catholic region.

"The conference was a rare opportunity for researchers and activists in the region to share information and strategize about future reform efforts,"says Katzive. "Improving abortion access and preventing unwanted pregnancy are major priorities for groups throughout Latin America and the Caribbean."

The conference, which was held at Mexico's National Institute of Public Health, was sponsored by the Mexican National Academy of Medicine and the U.S.- based Population Council and Alan Guttmacher Institute. According to the World Health Organization, about four million abortions are performed each year in Latin America. Each year approximately 5,000 women die in Latin America and the Caribbean from unsafe abortions.

Health of Women and Environment Intertwined says UN Report

A degraded environment not only threatens women's health, especially their reproductive health, which is extremely sensitive to pollution, but also increases the time women must spend to find water and fuel and produce food, says a report by the UN Population Fund.

The UNFPA report, "State of World Population 2001," notes that women have become a vital part of the economies of many countries, both as a labor force and as skilled workers. This trend has increasingly put women at risk while working in damaged and unhealthy environments. Women are more than half of the world's agricultural work force. In Southeast Asia, women provide 90% of the labor for rice cultivation.

According to the report, in Gujurat, India deforestation has increased the amount of time women spend collecting wood from once every four to five days, to four or five hours a day. The contamination of water has increased the risk of women becoming ill from water-borne diseases while collecting water. In a village in China's Gansu province, discharges from a state-run fertilizer factory have been linked to a high number of stillbirths and miscarriages. Water pollution in three Russian rivers is a factor in the doubling of bladder and kidney disorders in pregnant women, according to studies cited by the report.

Women face increased health risks when combining a degraded environment with gender inequality in labor, says the report. Women in many countries, particularly the least developed countries, work 12 hours or more a day in and out of the home; in Africa and Asia, women work an average of 14 hours more each week then men.

The health of women and increased pressure on the environment will not be slowed without an active effort to meet the demands for reproductive health services, says the report. According to UNFPA, the world population could reach between 7.9 billion and 10.9 billion people by 2050, with that figure largely dependent on women's access to reproductive health services and education.

"While the report draws the link between a healthy environment and women's reproductive health, keeping the water and air clean is just one element to ensuring women's health," says Anika Rahman, director of the international program of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "First and foremost governments need to recognize the rights of women to self-determination. With that recognition should come support for women's access to the full range of reproductive services, including abortion and emergency contraception."

She adds, "Women not only need access to contraception, but also information on how to use it effectively. In addition, governments need to address the social and cultural barriers to women's enjoyment of their reproductive rights. Ensuring a sound environment is only part of the equation needed to protect women's health."

South Africa Sees Launch of Rape Insurance Scheme

South Africa has the tragic distinction of not only being the nation with highest number of people living with HIV/AIDS in the world, but also having the highest incidence of rape in the world. An insurance company is trying to capitalize on this deadly combination for South Africa's women and adolescent girls.

LifeSense Group, a private South African company, announced it will offer a rape-insurance scheme for women whose attackers are suspected to be HIV-positive, reported Reuters in November.

The program will cost women 15 rand or $1.58 per month. Those covered by the scheme can receive a 28-day program of AIDS drugs after an assault to cut the risk of catching the deadly disease. Counseling and help with legal fees is also included in the treatment, to the value of 19,000 rand (US$1,990).

"This is just another example of women having to pay for their safety, rather than putting the onus on society, which allows these rapists to thrive," says Kathy Hall Martinez of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

American International Group (AIG) will market the policy through its South African distribution network, LifeSense said.

This is not the first time an insurance company has dreamed up such a scheme. In 1999, a British insurance company, Commercial and General Union, offered "rape survival" insurance at about $4 a month with similar provisions. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights' "Women of the World: Anglophone Africa Progress Report 2001" other similar policies included coverage for "a facial, massage or aromatherapy" as a part of counseling rape victims.

More than 50,000 rapes in total are reported to police each year. With an estimated 5 million South Africans living with HIV/AIDS, sexual assault can be a death sentence for victims if they are not treated shortly after the attack.

Alaska Supreme Court Orders Hearing on Consent for Abortion

The Alaska Supreme Court in November recognized that young women should be extended the fundamental right of privacy in the State's constitution, which encompasses the right to obtain an abortion. The Court found, however, that the fate of a law requiring minors seeking an abortion to obtain the consent of a parent or judicial approval could not be determined without an evidentiary hearing.

The Court returned the case to the trial court to determine if the state has a "compelling interest" in enforcing the parental consent requirement. In doing so the Court rejected a superior court judge's ruling that the state should not require minors to obtain parental consent before undergoing an abortion when it does not impose the same requirement on young women who carry their pregnancy to term.

"We are confident that when this case returns to the trial court the evidence will show that the parental consent requirement fails to serve a compelling state interest," says Janet Crepps, staff attorney with the Center for Reproductive Rights, representing the plaintiffs. "Parental consent requirements will only serve to harm young women and are therefore unconstitutional."

In 1997, Alaska passed a law requiring that girls under the age of 17 would need permission from a parent or a judicial bypass to obtain an abortion. However, in August 1997, Superior Court Judge Sen Tan blocked enforcement of the law while it was undergoing a court challenge from Planned Parenthood and two Alaska doctors. Crepps and Joyce Bamberger of the Alaska Civil Liberties Union Foundation represent the plaintiffs in Planned Parenthood of Alaska v. State.

Judge Tan said in his ruling, pregnant teens "face irreparable harm" if the law remained in effect while the court challenge is pending. Judge Tan found the law unconstitutional because treating teens who wanted an abortion differently than teens who chose to have babies violated minors’ rights to equal protection. He stated that "no compelling state interest has been established to justify the classification of minors based on their reproductive choices."

In reversing Judge Tan, the Supreme Court said that because the statute infringes on the fundamental rights of minors, the State must prove that it furthers a compelling interest, but that the state must be given an opportunity to present evidence on the issue. No date has been set for the hearings.

Florida Supreme Court to Hear Appeal on Parental Notification Law

The Florida Supreme Court decided in November that it will hear the Center for Reproductive Rights' appeal of the state's requirement that doctors notify the parent's of minors before performing an abortion.

The law had been ruled constitutional by the 1st District Court of Appeal in February 2001, but the Court accepted a motion by the Center for Reproductive Rights to keep the law from taking effect until the state Supreme Court ruled whether or not it would grant an appeal of the case.

"This is a matter of tremendous importance to the young women of Florida," says Bebe Anderson, staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights and counsel for North Florida Women’s Heath and Counseling Services v. State.

Oral arguments for the case have been set for March 3, 2002. By requiring young women to seek parental notification prior to obtaining an abortion, Florida's law tramples on their constitutional right to choose abortion. The Center for Reproductive Rights argues that Florida guarantees all women this right, and the state should not place conditions on young women.

Plaintiffs in North Florida Women's Health & Counseling Services, Inc., et al. v. State of Florida, et al. include 12 abortion providers and clinics, as well as women's rights groups.

Rights Groups Send Letter to President Bush Asking Him to Lift Gag on Free Speech

The Center for Reproductive Rights led a coalition of reproductive rights groups in November in urging President George W. Bush to eliminate restrictions on free speech imposed by the global gag rule (GGR).

The Senate has supported overturning the policy that President Bush reinstated in January, in its version of the Foreign Operations appropriations bill. The anti-choice leaders in the House of Representatives have opposed including language that would overturn the GGR.

The policy prohibits overseas non-governmental organizations from using their own funds to provide abortion services, counseling, and referral. Groups are also forbidden from participating in abortion law reform.

Noting America's renewed commitment to liberty, the Center for Reproductive Rights led coalition sent a letter to President Bush stating that there could be no more appropriate time for the president to lift the gag on free speech.

The full text of the statement and its signatories is available.

Groups Call for Liberty and Security in September 11th Aftermath

The Center for Reproductive Rights joined a diverse coalition of 48 humanitarian, religious, human rights and civil liberties organizations in November to set recommendations for responding to the September 11th attacks. The groups stressed the importance of abiding by human rights and humanitarian law in acting to bring the perpetrators to justice and preventing future attacks.

The groups urged the United States to take "every reasonable step to ensure security for everyone in the United States," and called on the government to investigate and prosecute hate crimes and to uphold democratic freedoms.

Looking abroad, the groups said that "security and justice are mutually reinforcing goals that ultimately depend upon the promotion of all human rights for all people" and called on the United States to promote fundamental rights around the world and to ensure that other countries do not use the fight against terrorism as a pretext to justify repression.

As the war in Afghanistan continues, the groups advocated for "exceptional attention to protecting civilians and civilian objects from harm," and "safe access to humanitarian aid and security for humanitarian workers in order to provide the urgent assistance required by the millions of men, women and children inside Afghanistan."

Groups making the recommendations include: the Alliance for Justice, Amnesty International USA, CARE, Doctors of the World-USA, Human Rights Watch, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Muslim Public Affairs Council, National Council of Churches, Open Society Institute, Oxfam America, Physicians for Human Rights, Refugees International, Save the Children/US, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and the US Committee for Refugees.

The full statement and the list of all the organizations is available.

| |