Where Is NOW?

| Comments (0)

November 24, 2009 | Comments

A week ago I posted a piece (“Breast Cancer Test Balloon”) on the new breast cancer guidelines issued by the government panel, the U.S. Department of Preventive Services. Differing drastically from what was previously embraced, the panel announced that women could wait until age 50 to begin mammograms every other year (rather than annual mammograms beginning at age 40), and self examinations, deemed of “no value,” were unnecessary. So sounded the first shot in the government’s attempt to force cost-cutting rationing on to the American people, even if there might be casualties along the way.

I lamented a week ago that I know women who would not be here today had these been the guidelines in place when their cancers began to take hold, and I predicted you knew such women, too. I wondered, as well, how many women the government would deem an acceptable loss. Since thinking of these women, and wondering about the losses, innumerable voices have joined me in anger against this government bombshell, offering en masse a resounding: No way!

We never disappoint each other, do we.

Sure, we have, as predicted, heard from the usual suspects lockstepping in time behind this administration and its agenda – Katie Couric chirping that “sometimes change can actually be healthy,” and some controversial doc on MSNBC barking that sure, it’s rationing but get over it, shut up and suck it up! Level heads, however, have prevailed, from individuals in defense of themselves and the women they love, to such respected organizations as the American Cancer Society and Susan G. Komen for the Cure, all declaring allegiance to the previous guidelines, because, simply, they save lives.

But conspicuously absent from the fray has been the National Organization for Women. War has essentially been declared on the female gender by an administration hell-bent on socializing and rationing health care, and NOW’s response has been as deafening as the response we heard from them when Bill Clinton was having his way with a young intern. In other words, no response at all. Well, almost none. Just as they defended Bill with such words as “consensual” and “he’s done so much for women outside of the Oval Office,” NOW is practicing the same brand of appeasement here.

In response to the newly released guidelines, NOW is simply rehashing what has been recommended, reporting the new guidelines as news and leaving it at that, the end. Once again they circle their wagons, choosing to protect a democratic administration and forsaking the women who may be harmed by that administration’s success. At the same time, what remains truly deafening is NOW’s apoplectic meltdown over the possibility that publicly funded abortion may be struck (not bloody likely) from the health-care reform bill.

The upshot: NOW has made its choice, and, once again, women lose – this time feminist women as well as non-feminists, because breast cancer makes no such distinctions.

Betsy Siino | Comments