HEW Considers New Sterilization Guidelines

New York (LNS)--Under pressure from women's and Third World groups formed to end widespread sterilization abuse, the Department of Health, Edu. cation and Welfare (HEW) has recently proposed a new set of guidelines for federally-funded sterilizations. Although containing certain weaknesses, the regulations are seen by most groups as "a real victory"--"'an enormous step forward" for poor and Third World women who have long been targets of coerced sterilization.

The purpose of the new rules is to prevent situations in which patients decide to have sterilization operations because they lack adequate information about alternatives, fear reprisals, such as the withholding of welfare benefits or medical care, or give consent under coercion.

According to the proposed rules, a person considering being sterilized must be given the following information orally:

1) Advice that she or he is free to withhold or withdraw consent to the procedure at any time prior to the sterilization without affecting her or his right to future care or treatment, and without the loss or withdrawal of any federally-funded benefits to which the person might be otherwise entitled;

2) a description of available alternative methods of family planning and birth control;

3) a full description of the benefits or advantages she or he may expect to gain from the sterilization; 4) advice that the procedure is irreversible; 5) a thorough explanation of the specific sterilization procedure to be performed;

6) a full description of the discomfort and risks which may accompany and follow the procedure in.. cluding an explanation of the type and possible effects of any anaesthetic to be used;

7) advice that the sterilization will not be performed for at least 30 days from the oral consent; 8) an opportunity to ask and have answered any questions she/he may have concerning the procedure.

Authorized consent forms must be used to ensure that the required information is actually communicated to the patient and that the patient's consent is voluntary. The rules propose that the consent form should be in the primary language of the patient, and, if it is not, that an interpreter be made available to assist the individual. (There is, however, no provision that the counseling for sterilization be conducted in the patient's primary language.)

The proposed guidelines also establish special procedural protections for groups particularly vulnerable to coercion--mental incompetents and people in mental, correctional or other institutions.

The new rules will govern only federally funded sterilization, but it is expected that they will be made applicable to programs where HEW personnel actually perform steriliations such as the Indian Health Service -by administrative directive.

A lack of adequate inonitoring and enforcement provisions is the central weakness of the proposed regulations, according to Committee to End Sterilization Abuse spokesperson Karen Stamm. In its comments on the guidelines, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) urges yearly inspection of the consent forms by federal personnel; and periodic Inspections of at least the approximately 400 teaching hospitals throughout the country, where many poor and Third World women are treated, and where the CCR has discovered that many of the current guidelines are being violated.

More stringent regulations are also urged to protect Native American women in light of the large number of Indian women who have undergone coerced and uninformed sterilizations at the hands of the federally-operated Indian Health Service.

Further protection of the rights of people in institutions and those who have been judged mentally incompetent has also been urged.

"There are an awful lot of private homes for the mentally retarded that won't take people at all unless they're sterilized," said

and the

.

government has absolutely no control." She urged people who work with retarded people or in institutions to write up their experiences on how people do or do not exercise their rights in those situations and either present their testimony in their area's local hearings or send them to HEW in Washington. In coming weeks, HEW will hold public hearings throughout the country on the proposed guidelines.

Can

afford

a

Tegal abortion?

"It's very clear," said Stamm, "that the Department (HEW) at this point is open to pressure. And the more people who turn out and show interest, the better the chances are that things will be rewritten the way they ought to be."'

Unfortunately, no hearings are scheduled to be held in Cleveland.

Solve

the

issue

once

and

for all.

Get Sterilized

Anne Gibbons

Repressive Bill Passes Senate

On January 30,1978, the Senated voted 75-12 to approve S-1437, a repressive new Criminal Code which is a direct legacy of the Nixon era. The bill is a successor to the notorious S-1, which was written and proposed by the Nixon administration to reshape federal criminal law into a blueprint for a police state. Only massive public opposition prevented the passage of S-1, which was finally bottled up and died in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The current bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), has some differences from S-1, but is its equal in repressiveness. Among the aspects of S. 1437 are the following:

The bill makes it a misdemeanor to obstruct a government function by physical interference, which could bar demonstrations at all federal facilities. The legislators added a clause giving 5-day sentences in cases of "nonviolent demonstrations' which do not "significantly" impair or obstruct a government function. The catch is that "significant" will be determined by a federal prosecutor. The bill allows the government to appeal sentences it regards as too lenient.

The bill does little to encourage the use of alternatives to incarceration, including fines, restitution, intermittent incarceration, and community supervision and service.

The bill makes it possible to deny a prisoner eligibility for parole during the entire length of sentence, rather than one-third of sentence as the current law provides.

The bill would allow judges to preclude pretrial release of information necessary for the defense of suspects accused of murder, treason and sabotage.

The bill explicitly makes it a crime to make a false oral statement to a law enforcement official--without the presence of counsel or a corroborating witness.

The bill reenacts the wire-tapping law of 1968. Under that law, in 1976, 37,044 persons were overheard in 454,132 conversations, the overwhelming majority of which were in no way incriminating.

The bill can be read to include as "sabotage" any opposition to the development of weapons, editorials against the ABM, news stories exposing cost overruns, etc.

The bill also makes it a federal crime to fail to obey a public safety order; under this provision, members of the press and public could be ordered to disperse or even stopped from taking a photograph by a public officials who objected to their presence in an area where a riot was "impending." Further, activity now protected by the First Amendment, uch as withholding the identity of a news source,

could lose its constitutional protection as a hindrance to law enforcement.

Now that the Senate has passed this repressive bill, it will move over to the House, where the Carter administration will attempt to pressure quick, pas. sage. Opposition will have to be strong and hard is there is to be any chance of kiling the measure in the House. Write to your US. Representative c/o House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515 and urge a vote against this dangerous and repressive legislation.

Edited from The Guardian and ACLU Newsletter

Literature on S-1437 can be obtained from National Committee against Repressive Legislation, 1250 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 501, Los Angeles, Calif. 90017.

Akron:

ABORTION LEGISLATION

Last October an ordinance that will regulate abortions in Akron was introduced into City Council. The ordinance, written by members of the Akron Right to Life Society, is reported to be the toughest in the country. The ordinance will harass psychologically women seeking abortions, could deprive women of needed medical treatment, and could have serious ramifications on the use of certain contraceptives.

The actions and comments made by supporters of this ordinance have been outrageous. Two of the three people on the committee conducting the City Council hearings, including the chairperson, are sosponsors of the ordiance. Elsie Reaven, a pro-choice supporter, was quickly removed as chairperson of this committee prior to the beginning of the hear. ings. In a recent phone conversation with a woman opposed to the ordinance; Akron City Council President Ray Kapper became hysterical and screamed that "Pro-choice Coalition people are nothing more than a bunch of communists, hippies and whores." On a recent TV program, Kapper stated, "Women claim they have the right to abortion but they forget it was seven men who gave them this right. The obvious implication is that men can also take it away! The "compulsory pregnancy pushers" are using Akron as a testing ground and if sucessful, are planning to introduce the ordinance around the country. They have already taken action to have the ordinance introduced in the the Chicago and Cleveand City Councils, with Columbus and Cincinnati to follow.

Fobninry, 1978/What She Wants/page 1