ironically, i had made an appointment for an exam that i was running late to the day we went to the museum, and while i was on the phone rescheduling, i got that flat tire that led to the rest of the day's adventures. my appointment still stands for tuesday, but i am now questioning the extent of the services i'll ask for. i originally made an appointment for a pap, mammogram, std screening, and birth control...essentially, whatever they provide, i wanted it. as someone who believes in natural family planning and minimal medical intervention in regards to health care and treating illness and injury, my roommate asked me why on earth i was planning on hormonal birth control, and i stopped for a minute and asked myself the same question. i'm not in a relationship, i'm not sleeping with anyone, i have regular periods, and have access to condoms (thanks, PWA!). i am, however, interested in IUD's and am still considering having one put in, though the cost factor (supposedly $500+?) made me want to vomit a bit. i've stated my opinions on women in poverty and the apparant lack of access to contraception that leads to a high birth rate, and kind of scoffed at this because natural family planning is always available, though not as guaranteed as something that should eliminate the possibility of pregnancy entirely. obviously, i wasn't taking into consideration the cultural attitudes or gender roles of any given impoverished society, and that's another story; my point is that these things ARE expensive, and because i don't have $500 lying around to have an IUD put in, i'll be relying on other methods that don't prevent fertilization by altering the lining of the uterus/sperm access. here, you can read more about IUD's on planned parenthood's website.
anyway, i had been hearing on npr recently about the proposed changes to breast cancer screenings, and pushing back the age to 50 instead of 40 for routine exams. while i support less medical intervention and encourage self-awareness, i'm also torn. hpv, or abnormal cells on the cervix at the very least, is detected via pap and not self-examination. i would rather have a mammogram and/or pap (though maybe less frequently) and know rather than suffer because i opted out of medical care simply for the fact that it was medical. with most women (and men) becoming sexually active BEFORE the age of 21, like the article states as an appropriate age to begin annual exams, how would it make sense to push back the age? i do like the point that the article makes, however, about the overuse of exams and the necessity of such practices.
bottom line, i guess, is that i am torn. i would love to pass on the full exam tuesday, or at least, after having one complete exam, choosing not to do so again unless i felt i was at risk or maybe in three years. i would also like to see funding for women's health not be cut or compromised, and i feel that this is a sugarcoated way of taking money from us and putting it elsewhere in order to chip away at the government's deficit. the problem is that there is nothing to replace that money with. not better education, not any program encouraging self-examination, self-awareness, self-responsibility. women will, unfortunately, continue on with an ever-growing lack of access to proper services and we will be told that it's okay, that we're alright.
alright, i'm going back to the paper writing. for more politically charged writing on women's health, check out my friend michelle's blog. and, as always, feel free to leave your thoughts. i am by no means well-informed on these issues right now, which is kind of embarassing to admit after ranting for so long, but time is short right now and this paper is looming. spam me with links, if you have some.
