The movie, which premiered last week in Des Moines, promotes a strategy of pursuing federal legislation that would grant civil rights to fetuses, on the grounds that their equal protection rights are protected by the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, an idea championed by current presidential contender Newt Gingrich.

In a recent article, two physicians argue that the film is problematic because, in medicine, physicians must learn to separate their personal feelings from those of their patients.

Via ReligionDispatches.com:

Dr. Anthony Levatino, interviewed at length in the film, is an OB/GYN who formerly performed abortions. Levatino and his wife had fertility problems and were seeking to adopt a child; at one point he describes his regret as he was performing a first trimester abortion while he and his wife were undertaking that process. They eventually adopted a child who was later tragically killed after being hit by a car. Levatino describes a second trimester abortion he performed after the death of his daughter, after which he concludes about his patient, “I didn’t see her wonderful right to choose and I didn’t see what a great doctor I was helping her with her problem pregnancy.”

The Gift of Life draws on Levatino’s personal tragedy to portray his decision to stop performing abortions as a policy answer, rather than an individual, understandable response to grief. Dr. Daniel Grossman, senior associate at Ibis Reproductive Health, told me, “It is true that abortion providers often have conflicting feelings about the work we do.” But, he went on, “most of us have those feelings and are able to separate our personal feelings from those of our patients and what they need and want to do with their current pregnancy.”

Dr. Douglas Laube, Board Chair of Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health, echoed this view, describing Levatino’s reaction as “normal” given his circumstances, but noting that his patient’s reaction was not discussed. “I see it as a disconnect,” said Laube. “It does not connect logically with a reason not to support the right to choose. It’s his feelings versus her right to choose.”

Laube goes on to argue that the film peddles several abortion falsehoods, such as a claim that all fetuses feel pain and that abortion providers attempt to maximize the number of abortion procedures they perform, in order to profit from them:

The anti-choice activist Carol Everett claims she once worked for an abortion provider that aimed to perform three to five abortions on 13-18 year old girls so they would be accustomed to using abortion as a birth control method into adulthood. Dr. Laube called these claims “pure nonsense,” “pure fiction,” and “really a stretch.” He noted that abortion comprises 3-5% of Planned Parenthood’s budget, and that abortion is “certainly not a money-maker. At best, it’s a break-even.”

The fetal personhood movement, which aims to define life from the moment of conception, has swept the country in recent years. Personhood initiatives have cropped up in many states — most notably in Mississippi, where a personhood amendment was recently rejected by voters despite support from state policy-makers. In Florida, personhood organizers have told The Florida Independent that they are currently working toward placing an amendment on the state’s 2014 ballot.

In an interview conducted last month, Laube told the Independent that attempts to define human life from the moment of conception “flies in the face of common sense” and could have “wide-reaching impact to access to women’s health: cancer treatment, fertility treatment, birth control.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (FLORIDA INDEPENDENT/ Cooper Levey-Baker) 

The bill, the Andrew Connolly Veterans’ Housing Act, extends the authority of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide specially adapted housing assistance to individuals residing temporarily in house owned by a family member for a period of five years, ending in 2016. Without the reauthorization, the program will end this year.

Braley named the bill after Dubuque veteran Andrew Connolly, who traveled to Washington, D.C. this week to provide testimony on why the program should be extended.

“Today I am praying for all soldiers and veterans, that they may have the support and dignity they deserve, without having to jump through hoops, or have a friend in politics,” Connolly said during his testimony.

During a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Braley said that Connolly’s personal story struck a major nerve with everyone participating in the subcommittee hearing.

“There were representatives at the table testifying with Andrew from AmVets, the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars and the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans associations. These are people who testify regularly in front of Congressional hearings. You should have seen the looks on their faces as they listened and reacted to Andrew’s testimony,” Braley told The Iowa Independent.

“Based on my observations, there was widespread support for extending the program, based on his compelling testimony.”

There is currently no cost estimate associated with the extension of the veterans’ housing program.

“Based on my own personal observations of the impact of this program on deserving families like Andrew and Jenny Connolly,” Braley said, “this is one cost that American taxpayers should never be afraid of incurring.”

Survivors of the attack and first responders have been diagnosed with increased rates of leukemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, as well as esophageal, prostate and thyroid cancer, according to sources that have seen the federally funded longitudinal study that the New York Fire Department has undertaken for the last seven years. In addition, the study will reportedly show World Trade Center workers of all ages have increased rates of the blood cancer multiple myeloma, with is usually found only among the elderly. The study is set to be released to the general public soon.

Bolstering the findings of the study is the fact that more than 600 of the 10,000 people involved in a lawsuit against the city of New York seeking compensation for damages resulting from 9/11 have been diagnosed with cancer. Since June 2010, 345 Ground Zero workers have died of cancer.

It’s as yet unclear exactly why Ground Zero exposure has caused such heightened levels of cancer, though previous reports on health problems among Ground Zero workers have cited exposure to smoke and alkaline dust as triggers for a wide variety of complaints.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, an alternative and potentially offensive hypothesis has crept up among the margins of the Internet.

Conspiracy theorists who maintain that the 9/11 attacks were planned and executed by the U.S. government to provide a pretext for war in the Middle East have seized upon the news as evidence that the destruction at the World Trade Center was, in fact, from a nuclear detonation. This theory ignores the fact that there are plenty of carcinogens that can result from widespread destruction, even without the aid of nuclear weapons, as evidenced by the little-reported massive surge in cancer rates in Fallujah, Iraq, following the U.S. invasion of the city.

The news that 9/11 responders are suffering from cancer at inordinate rates may create some political fallout for Senate and House Republicans, who blocked passage last year of a bill that would have provided a total of $7.4 billion to compensate 9/11 victims and their families and to monitor and treat health problems stemming from Ground Zero. Democratic advocates for the measure, like Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), spoke out strongly at the time against the death of the bill.

Here’s a rundown of the report’s findings, from a summary provided by the groups:

• “The toxic metals arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, chromium and selenium contained in coal ash contribute to several forms of cancer, as well as lung disease, kidney disease, mental retardation, breathing problems and even death.”
• “The report documents the analysis of 73 samples of coal ash waste that showed that pollutants including arsenic and selenium can leach into drinking water at levels exceeding those which the federal government defines as hazardous, sometimes by orders of magnitude.”
• “Coal ash spills, leaks and leaches into surface and ground water, are absorbed by fish and other animals, and can even be delivered by the air people breathe.”
• “Low-income communities often carry a disproportionate burden of living near coal ash facilities.”

The 86-year-old is the second-oldest sitting U.S. senator — behind the ailing Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) — and was first elected to the Senate in 1982.

From The Star-Ledger:

The Democrat still plans to finish out his current term – his fifth in the Senate – and seek re-election in 2014.

“This doesn’t change any of that,” Lautenberg’s chief aide, Dan Katz, said of the senator’s political plans. “After he receives his treatment, back to normal.”

That’s not even surprising. In 1991, then-Col. Petraeus was shot in the chest by accident during a live-fire training exercise at Fort Campbell and underwent an extremely painful pre-surgery procedure and then a lengthy surgery. Tom Ricks recounts what happened “less than a week later” when a restless Petraeus grew tired of his Fort Campbell recuperation and sought a discharge:

“That’s impossible– you’re not going home,” the doctor said.

“Can I demonstrate to you the degree of my recovery?” asked Petraeus.

The doctor asked what he meant. “Just undo my tubes here,” Petraeus said. “Don’t worry, I’m not going to do anything to hurt myself, just undo my tues.” He got down on the floor and counted out 50 push-ups for the doctor, who then allowed him to leave the hospital.

That’s a Chuck Norris move right there. The odds are clearly against cancer.

Novak would often tell aspiring journalists to pick a different field if their goal was to change the world.  But, by simply aiming to inform and to do his job as well he could, Novak changed the lives of his readers and those of us blessed to work with him.

Update: Lynn Sweet confirms it:

“He was someone who loved being a journalist, love journalism and loved his country and loved his family,” Novak’s wife, Geraldine, told the Sun-Times on Tuesday.

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd has been diagnosed with early-stage prostate cancer.

Dodd is scheduled to undergo surgery during the Senate’s August recess and said he expects to be back at work after a “brief recuperation” at home.

“It’s something that’s very common among men my age,” said Dodd, who is 65 and the father of two young daughters. “In fact, one in six men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer at some point during their life.”

Dodd, a Democrat, said he feels fine and intends to run for re-election in November 2010. “As you have probably noticed, I’m working some long and hard hours lately,” he said. “And that will continue.”

Senator Specter has launched “Specter for the Cure”, a bold new initiative to reform our governments medical research efforts, cut red tape and unstrangle the hope for accelerated cures. The centerpiece of Specter for the Cure is the Cures Acceleration Network (“CAN”)- a new institution, answering to the President of the United States, the sole mission of which is to turn medical research into disease cures.

The CAN is a project of Specter’s, not any third party charity. Indeed, it has a better chance of passing if Specter remains in the Senate, but this is an odd way of putting that.

Donors are told they’ll get more than the average donor to Specter:

Those who sign up to donate a minimum of $10 each month for ten months, will receive members only information on the Senator’s effort to transform medical research and accelerate cures … Please make a contribution to Specter For The Cure and become a member and receive insider updates.

So is Specter for the Cure really a separate organization that will give its donors special cancer research updates but give the money to the Specter 2010 campaign? It’s really quite strange.

In any event, here are some of the likely candidates expected to be considered for the next vacant Supreme Court post.

If Ginsburg is the first to step down, then observers expect it’s likely to be a woman, given that Ginsburg has been the only woman on the court since Sandra Day O’Connor — the first-ever female justice, appointed in 1981 — retired from the high court in 2006.

Some women likely to be considered include: Sonia Sotomayor, a Bronx-born woman of Puerto Rican descent, who is currently a federal appeals court judge in New York, nominated by the first President Bush; Diane P. Wood, a federal appeals court judge in Chicago, nominated by President Clinton; and Elena Kagan, the former dean at Harvard Law School recently nominated to be solicitor general.

If Justice Stevens steps down first, some prominent men would likely be in the running, including Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts, a former Justice Department official under Clinton and a friend of Obama; Harold Hongju Koh, dean of Yale Law School and probably the most politically liberal of Obama’s potential picks; and Merrick B. Garland, a federal appeals court judge in Washington appointed by President Clinton and, like Obama, a graduate of Harvard Law School. Cass Sunstein, the Harvard law professor, friend and advisor to President Obama who’s been named administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, is also considered a possible choice.

My own hope is that Justice Ginsburg has a speedy and full recovery and can continue to serve on the bench for years to come.  A widely respected, careful and non-ideological judge with a tremendous intellect, she strikes me as an ideal judicial model. There is no prognosis yet available for her recovery. She has said that she’d like to remain a justice well into her 80′s.

Many of the justices, of course, have had serious health problems on the court, including many cancers.  Here’s an interesting video interview with veteran Supreme Court reporter Tony Mauro about Justice Ginsburg’s condition and the history of the court’s grappling with illnesses on the court.