OT: US FDA reproductive health policy to be defined by Christian doctor/author

[Guest guest]

Saw this on a local pagan group. I am curious what US members of

this group think of this, as non-Christians. ... This can be a

touchy topic. Let's try to avoid flaming, and maintain mutual

respect compassion and courtesy, please.

 

Personally I am pro-choice and pro-life. I don't think

contraception or abortion or infertility treatment or hormone

therapy are evil per se. I don't especially like public policy to be

defined by any religious agenda. I am unfamiliar with how these

topics are viewed among Hindus, and appreciate any education you can

kindly offer.

 

+++++++++

Well, it didn't take long....

 

President Bush has announced his intention to appoint Dr. W. David

Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)

Reproductive

Health Drugs Advisory Committee. This committee has not met for more

than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result,

the

Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with

new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.

The

FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial

decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of

obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone

therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical

alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy

termination.

Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring

Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ

healing women

with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of health care

are

far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology and modern

gynecological practice. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who

describes

himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives

to unmarried women. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife,

entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that

women who suffer

from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible

and

praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction

Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive

Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed

the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control

pill

is an abortifacient (causes abortion).

We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color

his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's

lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Dr. Hager's track

record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-

making

makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair

of

this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be

held hostage by anti-abortion politics. Members of this important

panel

should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather

than

politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

 

++++

The article recommended writing the White House and circulating

petitions against this appointment, which is solely up to the

President (no Congressional action for this type of appointment).

[Guest guest]

Dr. Hager has been appointed to the committee; this is a done deal.

However, he is not the committee's chairman:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/hager.htm

 

For well-researched information on nearly all the alarmist stuff you

see floating around on the Internet (both true and urban legend), see

 

The Urban Legends Pages

http://www.snopes.com/

 

-- In , "seed_crystal"

<seed_crystal> wrote:

> [....]

> President Bush has announced his intention

> to appoint Dr. W. David

> Hager to head up the Food and Drug

> Administration's (FDA) Reproductive

> Health Drugs Advisory Committee.[....]

[Guest guest]

, "msbauju" <msbauju>

wrote:

>

>

> Dr. Hager has been appointed to the committee; this is a done deal.

> However, he is not the committee's chairman:

> http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/hager.htm

> ...

 

Thanks! I cannot find any confirmation he is to be made chairman or

any other indication this is current news.

[Guest guest]

>Saw this on a local pagan group. I am curious what US members of

>this group think of this, as non-Christians. ... This can be a

>touchy topic. Let's try to avoid flaming, and maintain mutual

>respect compassion and courtesy, please.

 

You do not have to worry about that from me. I find it hypocritical to

bash other religions just because they bash mine.

>Personally I am pro-choice and pro-life. I don't think

>contraception or abortion or infertility treatment or hormone

>therapy are evil per se. I don't especially like public policy to be

>defined by any religious agenda. I am unfamiliar with how these

>topics are viewed among Hindus, and appreciate any education you can

>kindly offer.

>From what I understand, Hindus in general do not believe in abortion.

However, a while back, there was the fear of bad downries (spelling?) and it

was common for women to abort their female babies so that the family would

not have to deal with the problem. Abortions I think are still allowed in

the country (again, I would have to "update" my tiny brain chip, Lol), but

there are still plenty of conservative Hindus that frown on the practice.

 

As far as my personal opinion goes... I am Pagan, yes, but I am actually

pretty conservative on the issue. I personally feel that abortions are not

necessary, and do not like it when people abuse it. I would not abort a

child, even if it meant my own death. However, I do not think that

outlawing it in the United States will solve the problem. I support the use

of education, encouragement of adoption, and counseling services to cut down

the abortions, outlawing abortion will not solve the problem - this was done

a long time ago, but women still did it (and in very dangerous ways!).

There is a counseling service here and amazingly enough, they are pretty

successful on lowering the number of abortions.

 

Blessings,

>+++++++++

>Well, it didn't take long....

>

>President Bush has announced his intention to appoint Dr. W. David

>Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA)

>Reproductive

>Health Drugs Advisory Committee. This committee has not met for more

>than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result,

>the

>Bush Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with

>new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.

>The

>FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial

>decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of

>obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone

>therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical

>alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy

>termination.

>Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women: Restoring

>Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ

>healing women

>with case studies from Hager's practice. His views of health care

>are

>far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology and modern

>gynecological practice. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who

>describes

>himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives

>to unmarried women. In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife,

>entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that

>women who suffer

>from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible

>and

>praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction

>Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive

>Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed

>the medically inaccurate assertion that the common birth control

>pill

>is an abortifacient (causes abortion).

>We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color

>his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's

>lives or to preserve and promote women's health. Dr. Hager's track

>record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-

>making

>makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair

>of

>this committee. Critical drug public policy and research must not be

>held hostage by anti-abortion politics. Members of this important

>panel

>should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather

>than

>politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

>

>++++

>The article recommended writing the White House and circulating

>petitions against this appointment, which is solely up to the

>President (no Congressional action for this type of appointment).

>

>

>

>

>

>

>