Recently, President Obama set forth an amendment to his former proposal regarding the universal healthcare program and more specifically, contraception. Originally, "Obamacare" stated that companies with over 50 employees could either sponsor a health plan(including preventative medication like contraception) for their employees or pay fines for not doing so. When this original version was enacted, it outraged a number of leaders within religiously affiliated organizations. In Obama's newest revision he attempts to accommodate those who saw issues with providing contraception to their employees because of religious reasons. This isn't the first time that religion has interfered with a woman's right to choose contraception, yet our president is adjusting the health care reform to suit their right to religion. How about the employees’ right to choose? Not everyone that works for a faith-based organization follows the faith as strictly as might that organizations’ leaders. Should all employees be subjected to a different lifestyle because their employer holds differing beliefs. Obama's latest proposed change is that the organization wouldn't have to pay for the contraception coverage but that the individual could obtain a separate plan to cover contraception needs. This poses another challenging situation. What challenges might it present for that employee to receive that extra coverage? If their employer already disagrees with the practice of contraception, will it create an environment in which people that need it will feel comfortable asking for it? If businesses and organizations have such power over government, where will the exceptions and the interference with citizens rights stop?
Sources:
Bill Losey
Huffington Post
Friday, March 29, 2013
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Has anyone heard of the VAWA???
I recently read an article on the Huffington Post about a bill that was just reauthorized by the President today. The author, Valarie Jarrett, writes that the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is now back in place and strengthened, making it easier for communities to help those who are affected by domestic and sexual violence.
Jarrett states that the act will affect all women and men affected by violence, with a focus on young people and minorities. Colleges will now make better efforts to provide information about dating violence,sexual assault and stalking. The article states that the bill will continue to provide "the vital resources they(victims) deserve."
The key words that stick out in this article are "continue," continue, what? Maybe it is just me but this is the first I am hearing of the VAWA. Working at a shelter for young moms, the majority of whom are minorities and victims of the violence mentioned in the article, you would think I would have heard about it.
If the government wants to help, they can start with studying unreported violence and encouraging women to come forward. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence Only 25% of all physical assaults and 20% of all rapes against females by their partners are reported to the police. Of the cases that do get reported, on average, a woman will be assaulted by her partner or ex-partner 35 times before reporting it. The government could provide more support to non-profits, and other companies that give refuge to the victims. The efforts the article mentions seems to fall short when it comes to the majority of victims who suffer anonymously.
I applaud the government for their efforts, really, however if the creators of the VAWA researched a little more they would find that according to Futures Without Violence women of all ages are at risk for domestic and sexual violence, and those age 20 to 24 are at the greatest risk of experiencing nonfatal intimate partner violence. Young women age 20 to 24 also experience the highest rates of rape and sexual assault, followed by those 16 to 19. People age 18 and 19 experience the highest rates of stalking. I believe the government should start addressing the issue at the same time as Sex Education.
Jarrett states that the act will affect all women and men affected by violence, with a focus on young people and minorities. Colleges will now make better efforts to provide information about dating violence,sexual assault and stalking. The article states that the bill will continue to provide "the vital resources they(victims) deserve."
The key words that stick out in this article are "continue," continue, what? Maybe it is just me but this is the first I am hearing of the VAWA. Working at a shelter for young moms, the majority of whom are minorities and victims of the violence mentioned in the article, you would think I would have heard about it.
If the government wants to help, they can start with studying unreported violence and encouraging women to come forward. According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence Only 25% of all physical assaults and 20% of all rapes against females by their partners are reported to the police. Of the cases that do get reported, on average, a woman will be assaulted by her partner or ex-partner 35 times before reporting it. The government could provide more support to non-profits, and other companies that give refuge to the victims. The efforts the article mentions seems to fall short when it comes to the majority of victims who suffer anonymously.
I applaud the government for their efforts, really, however if the creators of the VAWA researched a little more they would find that according to Futures Without Violence women of all ages are at risk for domestic and sexual violence, and those age 20 to 24 are at the greatest risk of experiencing nonfatal intimate partner violence. Young women age 20 to 24 also experience the highest rates of rape and sexual assault, followed by those 16 to 19. People age 18 and 19 experience the highest rates of stalking. I believe the government should start addressing the issue at the same time as Sex Education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)