6 ms·

For context, this is the drug being discussed: > Depo-Provera is a well-known brand name for medroxyprogesterone acetate, a contraceptive injection that contai

by kromem 3y ago

For context, this is the drug being discussed: > Depo-Provera is a well-known brand name for medroxyprogesterone acetate, a contraceptive injection that contains the hormone progestin. Depo-Provera is given as an injection every three months. Depo-Provera typically suppresses ovulation, keeping your ovaries from releasing an egg. It also thickens cervical mucus to keep sperm from reaching the egg. https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/depo-provera/about/pac-20392204 https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/depo-provera/abo... Given this is a temporary acting drug, and the term 'sterilization' typically refers to at least partially irreversible surgical interventions, the headline is quite misleading and better characterized as "Forced contraception" or - given the available details - "Giving contraception without informed consent"

kevinventullo 3y ago
Is the outcome not the same? This is splitting hairs on an egregiously unethical policy. The investigation also reported an almost 50% decline in the birth rate of Ethiopian women in the prior decade. A government official acknowledged the practice of injecting women of Ethiopian origin with the long-acting contraceptive Depo-Provera in 2013… …A Channel 10 poll indicated that a majority of Israelis support expelling African migrants from the country, with 56% in favor of the government’s decision to deport the migrants.
- mola 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - richbell 3y ago
    > This piece is part of an ongoing Iranian campaign to destroy Israel, and make ppl in the west forget about the heinous massacare that happened on Oct 7. Where Hamas terrorists invaded Israel and attacked villages killing whole families in bed, raping mothers Infront of their children. Killing babies. Gauging eyes. Burning children alive. And taking hundreds of hostages, aged 9momth to 90 year old. Yes, that's terrible. However, your comment is whataboutism that is trying distract from the subject of the article using emotionally charged language.
    - mola 3y ago
      No, it is context for the sudden interest in a scandal discussed to death in Israel over 10 years ago. It's not about exposing some scandal, it's about framing Israel as some psychotic evil thing thus legitimizing massacares such that happened on Oct7, and turning public opinion rabidly against Israel I'll be the last person to defend everything Israel does, but bloodthirsty evil we are not. Oh, and I'm not using emotional rhetoric, I'm really feeling these emotions. You have no idea what we have been through, and then seeing the barrage of unhinged lies and half truths being thrown against us really is scary and disheartening.
      - richbell 3y ago
        > No, it is context for the sudden interest in a scandal discussed to death in Israel over 10 years ago. Do you have proof that Iran is responsible for the linked post? If not, I wouldn't consider that providing context. > It's not about exposing some scandal, it's about framing Israel as some psychotic evil thing thus legitimizing massacares such that happened on Oct7, and turning public opinion rabidly against Israel. How can you make that claim? Also, turning opinion against Isreal (by highlighting things they've done) and legitimizing killing innocents are not part and parcel. People being informed about both sides of a conflict is a good thing, isn't it? > Oh, and I'm not using emotional rhetoric, I'm really feeling these emotions. You have no idea what we have been through, and then seeing the barrage of unhinged lies and half truths being thrown against us really is scary and disheartening. I sympathize with you, but even if it's genuine it's still emotionally charged rhetoric. Your comment comes across as "this thing that happened 10 years ago doesn't matter because Hamas attacked Israel recently". It's a nonsequitor that makes your sentiment appear disingenuous, even if it isn't.
        mola 3y ago
        [flagged]
        enterprise_cog 3y ago
        You’re just repeating hasbara talking points. River to the sea doesn’t mean ethnically cleansing, like Israel has done to Palestinians. It means a one state solution, with Arabs and Jews as equals. You choose to interpret it as a call for genocide, but I get why you do: projection. Quick question: how many of those dead on the 7th were due to IDF attacking Israelis? How many hostages have died from IAF airstrikes? You talk about brutal videos of the 7th, when you can see the same thing and worse every single day in Gaza. You talk about tragedy when 1000s of kids in Gaza have died and you don’t seem to care. Only Israelis dying matter to you. I wonder why.
- kromem 3y ago
  Is providing medical treatment without informed consent unethical? Absolutely. But the outcome between regular administration of a drug that wears off in less than 10 months and surgical interventions that are mostly irreversible permanently sterilizing someone are very different things and not "splitting hairs." As well, you are deliberately ignoring what the article points to as other factors which might be in part playing into differences in birthrates: > A 2016 study argued that the rapid decline in fertility rates among Ethiopian Israeli women following their migration to Israel was not the result of the administration of Depo-Provera, but rather the product of urbanization, improved educational opportunities, a later age of marriage and commencement of childbirth, and an earlier age of cessation of childbearing[1]. Was there a decline in birthrates? Yes. Was that in part because of an unethical dosing off a drug without informed consent or under coercive conditions? Probably. Is that still a world of difference from permanently sterilizing a population? Yes, very much so.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - kevinventullo 3y ago
    For the women who did not have children that otherwise would have, it is functionally identical to permanent sterilization. Also, in my opinion, the horror here is less about the efficacy of the policy and primarily about the intent behind it.
    - kromem 3y ago
      How is now stopping the med and have children in 10 months functionally identical to never being able to have children ever in the future?
      - kevinventullo 3y ago
        Is there any indication that the original policy was to stop after ten months? If the forced contraception is repeatedly administered over a long enough period of time that the women can no longer reproduce, there is no functional difference.
- zoky 3y ago
  Except it’s not even clear that it was public policy, and in fact most likely wasn’t: > From the available evidence, it appears likely that some Ethiopian women were given contraceptive injections without fully understanding the potential side effects or their alternative options. However, there is no clear evidence indicating that the Israeli government or humanitarian organizations involved purposefully coerced women into receiving injections in an effort to reduce birth rates—though the narrow scope of the investigation into those claims has been criticized. It sounds like many Ethiopian women went to the same few clinics (likely because ethnic groups tend to form enclaves) where Depo-Provera was commonly prescribed, and some of the women who were prescribed it were not fully informed of the side effects or the alternatives. In fact, the way this was addressed was to issue a directive to doctors and pharmacies not to refill prescriptions unless the recipient understood the ramifications of taking the medication: > In response to a letter sent by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel in January 2013 and pressure from a number of female members of Israel’s legislature, Ronni Gamzu—the director general of Israel’s Health Ministry—instructed gynecologists in the country’s four health maintenance organizations to cease use of the long-acting contraceptive injection in question, Depo-Provera, if there were any questions around the patient’s comprehension of the treatment. Gamzu reportedly directed medical providers “not to renew prescriptions for Depo-Provera if for any reason there is concern that [the patient] might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.” So while some women may not have been fully aware of the side-effects of the medication or been aware of alternatives (perhaps due to language barriers or doctors simply not going into detail as they should have), there is scant evidence that any of these women were unaware that they were taking birth control or did not desire to do so. And there is zero evidence that these injections were in any way “forced”; these women were voluntarily refilling their prescriptions, not being told to take the medication or risk deportation. This all sounds like somebody with an anti-Israel bias took what amounts to a relatively minor medical ethics issue and twisted it into claims of “forced sterilization”. That’s what’s really unethical here.
  - kevinventullo 3y ago
    This all sounds like somebody with an anti-Israel bias… According to the article, the original report aired on the Israeli Educational Television show Vacuum: https://www.timesofisrael.com/ethiopian-women-claim-israel-forced-them-to-use-birth-control-before-letting-them-immigrate/amp/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/ethiopian-women-claim-israel-f... The anchor interviewed Ethiopian women who said they thought the shots were vaccinations. “The women claimed Israeli representatives from the Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) and the Health Ministry told them that raising large families is especially difficult, that it is for hard people with many children to find work and support their families, and that many landlords would not be willing to rent apartments to large families.” This is from Times Of Israel, not Al Jazeera.
- IshKebab 3y ago
  Uhm I don't think many people would agree that forced contraception and forced sterilisation are remotely the same thing.
  - kevinventullo 3y ago
    If the forced contraception is repeatedly administered and done over a long enough period of time that the women can no longer reproduce, there is no functional difference.

by kromem 3y ago

kevinventullo 3y ago

Is the outcome not the same? This is splitting hairs on an egregiously unethical policy. The investigation also reported an almost 50% decline in the birth rate of Ethiopian women in the prior decade. A government official acknowledged the practice of injecting women of Ethiopian origin with the long-acting contraceptive Depo-Provera in 2013… …A Channel 10 poll indicated that a majority of Israelis support expelling African migrants from the country, with 56% in favor of the government’s decision to deport the migrants.

mola 3y ago
[flagged]
- richbell 3y ago
  > This piece is part of an ongoing Iranian campaign to destroy Israel, and make ppl in the west forget about the heinous massacare that happened on Oct 7. Where Hamas terrorists invaded Israel and attacked villages killing whole families in bed, raping mothers Infront of their children. Killing babies. Gauging eyes. Burning children alive. And taking hundreds of hostages, aged 9momth to 90 year old. Yes, that's terrible. However, your comment is whataboutism that is trying distract from the subject of the article using emotionally charged language.
  - mola 3y ago
    No, it is context for the sudden interest in a scandal discussed to death in Israel over 10 years ago. It's not about exposing some scandal, it's about framing Israel as some psychotic evil thing thus legitimizing massacares such that happened on Oct7, and turning public opinion rabidly against Israel I'll be the last person to defend everything Israel does, but bloodthirsty evil we are not. Oh, and I'm not using emotional rhetoric, I'm really feeling these emotions. You have no idea what we have been through, and then seeing the barrage of unhinged lies and half truths being thrown against us really is scary and disheartening.
    - richbell 3y ago
      > No, it is context for the sudden interest in a scandal discussed to death in Israel over 10 years ago. Do you have proof that Iran is responsible for the linked post? If not, I wouldn't consider that providing context. > It's not about exposing some scandal, it's about framing Israel as some psychotic evil thing thus legitimizing massacares such that happened on Oct7, and turning public opinion rabidly against Israel. How can you make that claim? Also, turning opinion against Isreal (by highlighting things they've done) and legitimizing killing innocents are not part and parcel. People being informed about both sides of a conflict is a good thing, isn't it? > Oh, and I'm not using emotional rhetoric, I'm really feeling these emotions. You have no idea what we have been through, and then seeing the barrage of unhinged lies and half truths being thrown against us really is scary and disheartening. I sympathize with you, but even if it's genuine it's still emotionally charged rhetoric. Your comment comes across as "this thing that happened 10 years ago doesn't matter because Hamas attacked Israel recently". It's a nonsequitor that makes your sentiment appear disingenuous, even if it isn't.
      - mola 3y ago
        [flagged]
        enterprise_cog 3y ago
        You’re just repeating hasbara talking points. River to the sea doesn’t mean ethnically cleansing, like Israel has done to Palestinians. It means a one state solution, with Arabs and Jews as equals. You choose to interpret it as a call for genocide, but I get why you do: projection. Quick question: how many of those dead on the 7th were due to IDF attacking Israelis? How many hostages have died from IAF airstrikes? You talk about brutal videos of the 7th, when you can see the same thing and worse every single day in Gaza. You talk about tragedy when 1000s of kids in Gaza have died and you don’t seem to care. Only Israelis dying matter to you. I wonder why.
kromem 3y ago
Is providing medical treatment without informed consent unethical? Absolutely. But the outcome between regular administration of a drug that wears off in less than 10 months and surgical interventions that are mostly irreversible permanently sterilizing someone are very different things and not "splitting hairs." As well, you are deliberately ignoring what the article points to as other factors which might be in part playing into differences in birthrates: > A 2016 study argued that the rapid decline in fertility rates among Ethiopian Israeli women following their migration to Israel was not the result of the administration of Depo-Provera, but rather the product of urbanization, improved educational opportunities, a later age of marriage and commencement of childbirth, and an earlier age of cessation of childbearing[1]. Was there a decline in birthrates? Yes. Was that in part because of an unethical dosing off a drug without informed consent or under coercive conditions? Probably. Is that still a world of difference from permanently sterilizing a population? Yes, very much so.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- kevinventullo 3y ago
  For the women who did not have children that otherwise would have, it is functionally identical to permanent sterilization. Also, in my opinion, the horror here is less about the efficacy of the policy and primarily about the intent behind it.
  - kromem 3y ago
    How is now stopping the med and have children in 10 months functionally identical to never being able to have children ever in the future?
    - kevinventullo 3y ago
      Is there any indication that the original policy was to stop after ten months? If the forced contraception is repeatedly administered over a long enough period of time that the women can no longer reproduce, there is no functional difference.
zoky 3y ago
Except it’s not even clear that it was public policy, and in fact most likely wasn’t: > From the available evidence, it appears likely that some Ethiopian women were given contraceptive injections without fully understanding the potential side effects or their alternative options. However, there is no clear evidence indicating that the Israeli government or humanitarian organizations involved purposefully coerced women into receiving injections in an effort to reduce birth rates—though the narrow scope of the investigation into those claims has been criticized. It sounds like many Ethiopian women went to the same few clinics (likely because ethnic groups tend to form enclaves) where Depo-Provera was commonly prescribed, and some of the women who were prescribed it were not fully informed of the side effects or the alternatives. In fact, the way this was addressed was to issue a directive to doctors and pharmacies not to refill prescriptions unless the recipient understood the ramifications of taking the medication: > In response to a letter sent by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel in January 2013 and pressure from a number of female members of Israel’s legislature, Ronni Gamzu—the director general of Israel’s Health Ministry—instructed gynecologists in the country’s four health maintenance organizations to cease use of the long-acting contraceptive injection in question, Depo-Provera, if there were any questions around the patient’s comprehension of the treatment. Gamzu reportedly directed medical providers “not to renew prescriptions for Depo-Provera if for any reason there is concern that [the patient] might not understand the ramifications of the treatment.” So while some women may not have been fully aware of the side-effects of the medication or been aware of alternatives (perhaps due to language barriers or doctors simply not going into detail as they should have), there is scant evidence that any of these women were unaware that they were taking birth control or did not desire to do so. And there is zero evidence that these injections were in any way “forced”; these women were voluntarily refilling their prescriptions, not being told to take the medication or risk deportation. This all sounds like somebody with an anti-Israel bias took what amounts to a relatively minor medical ethics issue and twisted it into claims of “forced sterilization”. That’s what’s really unethical here.
- kevinventullo 3y ago
  This all sounds like somebody with an anti-Israel bias… According to the article, the original report aired on the Israeli Educational Television show Vacuum: https://www.timesofisrael.com/ethiopian-women-claim-israel-forced-them-to-use-birth-control-before-letting-them-immigrate/amp/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/ethiopian-women-claim-israel-f... The anchor interviewed Ethiopian women who said they thought the shots were vaccinations. “The women claimed Israeli representatives from the Joint Distribution Committee (JDC) and the Health Ministry told them that raising large families is especially difficult, that it is for hard people with many children to find work and support their families, and that many landlords would not be willing to rent apartments to large families.” This is from Times Of Israel, not Al Jazeera.
IshKebab 3y ago
Uhm I don't think many people would agree that forced contraception and forced sterilisation are remotely the same thing.
- kevinventullo 3y ago
  If the forced contraception is repeatedly administered and done over a long enough period of time that the women can no longer reproduce, there is no functional difference.