Topic

women's health

149 petitions

Update posted 3 hours ago

Petition to Pete Buttigieg, United States Department of Transportation

Women are 73% more likely to get injured in a car crash - Demand Equality for Women

Women are 73% more likely to be injured and 17% more likely to die in a car crash than men. The U.S. allows companies to crash-test cars with dummies based on a 1970s average male, and the government’s 5-star safety rating doesn’t require testing for women in the driver’s seat position. More equal testing standards and new crash test technology could save thousands of lives and prevent needless injuries. What can you do? Sign the petition below addressed to the U.S. Transportation Secretary Buttigieg, urging him to update car crash testing standards and technology — and account for women and other vulnerable groups — now! Our Petition: Dear Secretary Buttigieg, Government standards for vehicle crash testing are outdated and unequal. This deadly gender bias in vehicle safety is unacceptable. It is time to stop studying this issue and fix it now. Females are not just smaller versions of males. Due to differences in physiology and driver positioning, women’s and men’s bodies behave differently in a crash. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) – the agency that creates and oversees FMVSS and NCAP ratings – has been in possession of data for years that show women are 17%-18.5% more likely to die in a vehicle crash than men. But our government does not equitably account for these differences, either in design regulations (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, or FMVSS) or voluntary 5-star safety ratings (the New Car Assessment Program, known as NCAP). As a result of this government-supported bias in the design, women die and are more at risk of serious injury in a crash than men. That means up to 1,342 women are needlessly dying every year. But while crash test dummy manufacturers have created technologies that could make vehicles safer for women and other under-represented groups, neither the FMVSS nor NCAP has been updated to reflect advancements that would bring equality to vehicle design. NHTSA’s current NCAP 5-star rating voluntary crash test regime does not require testing female dummies in the driver’s seat. Instead, a dummy derived from the measurements of a 1970s average-sized male is used. Women are significantly more prone to whiplash in a crash.  Relative to males of the same age, females in deadly crashes were 9.4% more likely to die as a result of neck injury.  And differences are exacerbated when women become pregnant – for instance, standard seatbelts do not fit more than sixty percent of third-trimester pregnant women. People from all over the world, men and women alike, are coming together to ask the US Government to pay attention to this issue. We are asking for the following legislative and regulatory changes: NHTSA should immediately update NCAP.  By using outdated and male-centric crash-test dummies and by limiting the scope of testing of NCAP, NHTSA allows – according to its own research – hundreds of women to be killed every year.  NHTSA has the regulatory authority to update NCAP today and could do so with the stroke of a pen. NCAP should: Immediately transition to the latest generation of crash test dummy technology for both male and female occupants. Require all tests to use the most up-to-date male and female technology in the driver and passenger seat tests to ensure equitable testing to help close the safety gap for women and other vulnerable groups. Congress should create a structure that commits NHTSA to review the crash test landscape regularly with the intent of implementing the latest crash test technologies so that we never fall behind again.  Women and other vulnerable populations have waited long enough. It is time to stop studying this issue to death. Let 2022 be the year we turn words into action, update vehicle crash test standards and ratings, and save those who should have been treated equally all along.

John Bolton
1,795 supporters
Update posted 3 weeks ago

Petition to Connecticut State House, Connecticut State Senate, Ned Lamont

End Forced Pelvic Exams in Connecticut

*Please note that this petition contains clarifications to the original text. Imagine needing surgery. You would worry about a lot of things. Finding the best doctor. Finding the best hospital. Having a complication. Not waking up from the anesthesia. The pain you will experience afterwards. The list goes on. Now imagine having one more worry. But this one isn’t to do with your health. Rather, it is to do with protecting yourself. Protecting yourself from the possibility of forced vaginal or rectal penetration for the purpose of practice/education while you are unconscious and unable to give - or withhold - consent. Would you have the surgery? Would you take that risk? Now you may have a choice to make. Do you protect your health, and indeed, your own life by undergoing the surgery? Or do you protect your body from the potential of an unwanted and unwarranted invasion by not having the surgery, but in doing so risk your health, and maybe even your life? The situation above probably sounds ridiculous to you. It probably sounds like something out of a dystopian novel. But the reality is, this is the situation facing the people of Connecticut right now. Because of language commonly found in medical consent forms, teaching hospitals can have a lot of leeway in the way they use their patients in their teaching practices. Language in consent forms is often written to be broad, particularly surrounding the role of students and trainees in the provision of healthcare, which in many cases consists of only one or two lines, and follows the following formula: “I understand that students and trainees may be involved in my care and consent to treatment by providers in the event of unforeseen events or complications.” Those one or two lines are typically buried in the middle or at the end of a form, which patients often report being rushed to sign by providers or administrators as they are “standard.”  Most patients assume “student involvement” - unless otherwise specified - is limited to observation. Unfortunately in Connecticut, it is not illegal for medical students to practice pelvic and prostate examinations on anesthetized patients without their direct and informed consent.   There is a bill before the Connecticut state legislature right now - HB-5278 (updated to reflect the 2022 assigned bill number) - that would ban the use of non-consensual pelvic and prostate examinations as a part of the medical education process. It will still allow students to practice their clinical skills - it poses no threat to their education or to their ability and opportunity to one day become competent, confident, and experienced clinicians. It simply prohibits students from practicing these invasive examinations on patients who have not given their specific consent. HB-5278 (updated to reflect the 2022 assigned bill number) is the latest iteration of this legislation, which was first introduced in the Connecticut state legislature in 2019 as SB 16. Unfortunately, while other states have acted quickly to enact similar laws, Connecticut’s bill did not even get a hearing during the 2021 legislative session.  The Yale University School of Medicine came out in opposition to the original iteration of this legislation (SB 16 - An Act Prohibiting an Unauthorized Pelvic Exam on a Woman Who is Under Deep Sedation or Anesthesia) in 2019, submitting public testimony to the state legislature stating, in part, that “all consent forms contain specific language explaining the involvement of trainees in the decision making and procedural process.” Please take a moment to judge that for yourself. Sample consent form language - in this case Yale's - reads as follows: “I understand that some of the system hospitals are teaching hospitals. Doctors or other health practitioners who are members of the care team and are in training may help my practitioner with the procedure. I understand the purpose and potential benefits of the procedure in relation to my goals. I give permission to my responsible practitioner to do whatever may be necessary if there is a complication or unforeseen condition during my procedure.” *Disclaimer - Yale's consent form language is provided as an example here as they refer to consent forms in their 2019 public testimony in opposition to SB 16 - An Act Prohibiting an Unauthorized Pelvic Exam on a Woman Who is Under Deep Sedation or Anesthesia cited in the above paragraph.* Tell me - would you define a student or trainee as a “responsible practitioner” in the event of a complication or unforeseen condition? Would any reasonable person? And how does a student’s need for practice - which is in no way unforeseen and can be established ahead of time - fall under that category? And when you sign any consent form, at any medical institution or provider, stating you understand the benefits of a procedure to your goals, would you even begin to imagine that  an intimate examination by a student who is unlicensed conducted for the purpose of them practicing their clinical skills could possibly be covered under that language?  Interestingly enough, medical students from various states have expressed discomfort conducting intimate examinations on patients for the purpose of practice without knowing whether that patient has given direct and informed consent, but did not feel at liberty to voice their discomfort or opt out.  We aren’t asking for much. We aren’t asking teaching institutions to sacrifice the educational opportunities they offer their students, or to take opportunities away from students. We are simply insisting that those opportunities only be offered with the consent of the patients whose bodies they are using. We are insisting that exploitation and abuse no longer play a role in the medical education of our state’s future doctors, and that they are taught the importance of consent early on. And we are insisting that our laws protect us from the dehumanization and indignity of being turned into living teaching tools without our consent. Hospitals exist to serve their patients - patients do not exist to serve hospitals, and we do not owe hospitals the use of our bodies in exchange for necessary healthcare. *Disclaimer - Yale is referred to in this petition due to their 2019 public testimony in opposition to SB 16. It is not the intent of this petition to accuse or in any way allege that the Yale School of Medicine or any of its affiliates or students have ever participated in or are currently participating in these practices.* If you are a Connecticut resident just becoming aware of this practice, please join us in standing up and saying enough by signing this petition and contacting your state representative and senator. If you live outside of Connecticut, please stand in solidarity with our state’s residents and in demanding justice and protection for us when we are at our most vulnerable. In addition to signing below, please consider reaching out to the Public Health Committee at (phtestimony@cga.ct.gov or by phone at (860) 240‑0560. If you are a Connecticut resident, please consider reaching out to your state representative (if you unsure of who yours is, you can find out https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/cgafindleg.asp If you would like to learn more about this issue, please have a look at the following articles: Explicit Consent for Pelvic and Prostate Exams: A Case for CT House Bill 5067https://ctexaminer.com/2021/03/20/explicit-consent-for-pelvic-and-prostate-exams-a-case-for-ct-house-bill-5067/ Providers Are Sexually Assaulting Patients — and It’s Legalhttps://www.healthline.com/health/nonconsensual-internal-exams-sexual-assault#1 Medical Students Regularly Practice Pelvic Exams On Unconscious Patients. https://www.elle.com/life-love/a28125604/nonconsensual-pelvic-exams-teaching-hospitals/

Livia Fry
110,002 supporters
Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to Joseph R. Biden, Kamala Harris, Madeleine Dean, Jenniffer González-Colón, Gregory W. Meeks, Doris Matsui, Debbie Dingle

Petition to Advance the Rights of Widows in the United States and Worldwide

In the United States, widows are expected to control most of the $30 trillion in wealth of the baby boomer generation by 2030 -- a potential wealth transfer that approaches the annual GDP of the United States¹; yet American WIDOWS remain mostly invisible in the eyes of policy makers and the law. Every day, widows continue to fight for their rightful estates, social security benefits, bereavement leave, and access to healthcare.  Internationally, over 300 million widows endure systematic disinheritance of their rightful property, eviction, discrimination at the hands of laws and culture, and violent traditional cleansing rights that plunge them, and 600 million children, into vicious underworlds of poverty, human trafficking, child marriage, and violence.  And Covid-19 is a #WidowMaker. It’s time we begin to recognize the needs of widows, and their families, in the United States and beyond. It’s time to #MakeWidowsMatter.  We propose these important widow/widower recognitions: 1) Create a new office entitled The Office on Widowed Persons (OWP) within the Administration for Children & Families (ACF), a division of the US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).  The purpose of OWP would be to protect and assist widows and widowers in the United States. 2) Increase the number of bereavement days to be equal to the current allowable days for childbirth leave provided under Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). 3) Increase the current one-time survivor death benefit payment from $255 to $1,500. 4) Provide free healthcare (Medicare-like disability) for widows for a term of two to three years from the death of a spouse. 5) Introduce legislation ensuring the protection and monitoring of widows’ rights is prioritized in the future issuance of foreign aid. 6) Require the U.S. Department of State to include widows in its international human rights reporting requirements and to create programs to facilitate their economic and legal empowerment. 7) Call for the U.S. to propose a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly to protect rights and security of widows in the US and globally. 8) Call for the U.S. to propose a resolution in the United Nations Security Council to protect rights and security of widows in conflict and post conflict contexts. 9) Recognize International Widows' Day June 23 to coincide with the United Nations https://www.un.org/en/observances/widows-day  10) Designate U.S. National Widows' Week of Awareness - Annually, the week after Father’s Day. Father’s Day was inspired by a widower, and this is one way to honor mothers who act in place of fathers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers_Day_(United_States) 11) Designate U.S. National Widowers Week of Awareness - Recognized annually, the week after Mother’s Day. Mother’s day was inspired by a widow, and this is one way to honor fathers who act in place of mothers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother's_Day  Mr. President, Madam Vice-President, and members of Congress, the United States of America would be the first and only country to take such important steps towards the needs of this group of citizens. Let's lead the charge for these audacious and necessary changes. Modern Widows Club, Global Fund for Widows, and our joint community of global supporters and partners are fully behind these important proposals to improve widowed persons’ lives worldwide.  #ModernWidowsClub #GlobalFundForWidows #OneMillionWidows #WidowAdvocacy #WidowRights #MakeWidowsMatter #CovidIsaWidowMaker Citation: ¹ McKinsey & Company Financial "Women as the next wave of growth in U.S. wealth management" July, 29, 2020. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/women-as-the-next-wave-of-growth-in-us-wealth-management

Modern Widows Club
8,504 supporters