Friday, April 04, 2008
« K-12 Newsletter Resources |
Main |
Print Encyclopedias Join Dinosaurs »
The "world's largest database" on reproductive-health issues, run by Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health, has been blocking searches for the term "abortion" because of concerns over federal financing, according to Wired. A librarian at the University of California at San Francisco became "puzzled" on Monday after running a routine search, and she then wrote to the database's manager at Johns Hopkins to ask if the database had been changed. It has nearly 25,000 articles using the word. "We recently made all abortion terms stop words," the database's manager, Debbie Dickson, replied in an e-mail message. "As a federally funded project, we decided this was best for now." The database receives money from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the federal agency whose mission is "extending a helping hand to those people overseas struggling to make a better life, recover from a disaster or striving to live in a free and democratic country." Since 1973, the agency "has been legally prohibited from supporting or encouraging abortion as a method of family planning," according to the agency's Web site. -
UNITED STATES: GOVERNMENT :
DATABASES :
DEMOGRAPHY: ISSUES :
MEDICAL: ABORTION:
Government Database Restricting Information On Abortion
WEBBIB0708
Government Database Restricting Information On Abortion
The Experiment
< http://www.theexperiment.org/?p=2275>
Your tax dollars at work. Yesterday I saw a posting on the Progressive
Librarian Guild list stating that the word abortion was now a stop word*
on POPLINE, a database of the Worlds reproductive health literature This
means that they will not find results when a person uses abortion as a
search term. Nothing will come up. Librarian Activist says that:
A librarian wrote to the POPLINE database providers to ask why a search
strategy, probably involving the word abortion, retrieved fewer results
than it did 3 months earlier. The response was:
Yes we did make a change in POPLINE. We recently made all abortion terms
stop words. As a federally funded project, we decided this was best for
now.
Best for now? I dont think so. Contact POPLINE here.
Info about POPLINE from their site:
< http://db.jhuccp.org/ics-wpd/popweb/>
----------------------------------------
About POPLINE
< http://db.jhuccp.org/ics-wpd/popweb/aboutpl.html>
POPLINE(POPulation information onLINE), the world's largest database on
reproductive health, containing citations with abstracts to scientific
articles, reports, books, and unpublished reports in the field of
population, family planning, and related health issues. POPLINE is
maintained by the INFO Project at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of
Public Health/Center for Communication Programs and is funded by the
United States Agency for International Development. (USAID).
POPLINE contains nearly 360,000 records and has been maintained since 1973
by the INFO Project (formerly Population Information Program). The
majority of items are published from 1970 to the present, however, there
are selected citations dating back to 1827. The database adds 12,000
records annually and is updated every Monday.
In addition to free text searching, the database can be searched by
keywords from the POPLINE Thesaurus , a controlled vocabulary of 2,400+
terms used to index documents in the database.
POPLINE's special features include links to free, fulltext documents; the
ability to limit your search to peer-reviewed journal articles; RSS feeds
for topical searches; and many abstracts in French and Spanish.
----------------------------------------
USAID's Family Planning Guiding Principles and U.S. Legislative and Policy
Requirements
Restrictions on Support for Abortions
< http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/pop/restrictions.html >
Since the enactment of legislation in 1973, recipients of U.S. family
planning assistance have been legally prohibited from supporting abortion
as a method of family planning using U.S. funds. USAID places high
priority on preventing abortions through the use of family planning,
saving the lives of women who suffer complications arising from unsafe
abortion, and linking those women to voluntary family planning and other
reproductive health services that will help prevent subsequent abortions.
Download Arabic Translation [PDF, 83KB]
The Helms Amendment
No foreign assistance funds may be used to pay for the performance of
abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any
person to practice abortions.
Spanish [PDF, 19KB], French [PDF, 19KB]
Sources: Section 104(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended;
Annual Foreign Operations Appropriations Acts.
The Leahy Amendment
The term "motivate," as it relates to family planning assistance, shall
not be construed to prohibit the provision, consistent with local law, of
information or counseling about all pregnancy options.
Spanish [PDF, 19KB], French [PDF, 19KB]
Source: Annual Foreign Operations Appropriations Acts.
The Siljander Amendment
No foreign assistance funds may be used to lobby for or against abortion.
Source: FY 2006 Appropriations Act, Title II, "Child Survival and Health
Programs Fund" and/or Title V, Section 518.
The Biden Amendment
No foreign assistance funds may be used to pay for any biomedical research
which relates, in whole or in part, to methods of, or the performance of,
abortions or involuntary sterilization as a means of family planning.
Sources: Section 104(f) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended;
Annual Foreign Operations Appropriations Acts.
The Mexico City Policy
On January 22, 2001, President Bush restored the Mexico City Policy that
had been in place from 1985 1993. The Mexico City Policy requires foreign
(non-U.S.) nongovernmental organizations to certify that they will not
perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning as a
condition for receiving USAID assistance for family planning.
The press release accompanying President Bush's Memorandum of January 22,
2001 restoring the Mexico City Policy states that "[t]he President's clear
intention is that any restrictions do not limit organizations from
treating injuries or illnesses caused by legal or illegal abortions, for
example, postabortion care."
September 10, 2001 Memo from Duff Gillespie, Deputy Assistant
Administrator, Population, Health and Nutrition
This memo provides more information on USAID support for postabortion care
in the context of the Mexico City Policy. Available in English [PDF,
21KB], Spanish [PDF, 27KB], French [PDF, 24KB], Arabic [PDF, 70KB].
In August of 2003, the President extended the Mexico City Policy to
"voluntary population planning" assistance provided by the Department of
State. The President's memorandum excludes from the Mexico City Policy
"foreign assistance furnished pursuant to the United States Leadership
Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003." Therefore,
assistance solely for HIV/AIDS activities is not subject to the Mexico
City Policy.
Policy and Related Information:
Mexico City Policy Contract Information Bulletin (CIB) 01-08
Available in English [PDF, 27KB], Spanish [PDF, 169KB], French [PDF,
220KB], Arabic [PDF, 140KB].
----------------------------------------
Global Gag Rule: A Flawed Policy That Sacrifices Womens Lives
<http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/assets/files/
Abortion-Access-to-Abortion-Refusal-Clauses-Global-Gag.pdf>
A shorter URL for the above link:
< http://tinyurl.com/28pyn4>
On January 22, 2001, President George W. Bush reimposed the global gag
rule, a policy that prohibits the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID) from granting family]planning funds to any overseas
health center unless it agrees not to use its own, private, non]U.S. funds
for: (1) abortion services, (2) abortion]related advocacy, or (3) abortion
counseling or referrals. As originally formulated, the policy applied only
to groups that receive grants from the USAIDfs family]planning program. In
August 2003, however, the Bush administration expanded the policy to cover
the entire State Department budget.
History of the Global Gag Rule
The global gag rule, also known as the gMexico City policy,h was first
imposed by a Reagan administration executive order. The policy was
introduced in 1984 and carried through the end of the first Bush
administration. Upon taking office in 1993, President Clinton signed an
executive order repealing the policy. However, by 1999, after years of
fighting to reinstate the global gag rule, anti]choice lawmakers forced
President Clinton to reinstate the policy by linking it to the release of
nearly $1 billion in U.S. back dues to the United Nations.1 This marked
the first time the global gag rule was written into law. President Clinton
vowed that the provision would not be extended beyond the one]year
duration of the funding bill.
In October 2000, the House and Senate passed a final FYf01 foreign]aid
bill that repealed the global gag rule but postponed the release of any
FYf01 funds until February 15, 2001 1
The global gag rule operating from November 1999 until October 2000
differed from the original Reagan/Bush era policy in two respects. First,
the 1999]2000 global gag rule did not include a ban on health centersf
ability to counsel or refer patients to legal abortion services elsewhere.
Second, the policy allowed a small percentage of funds . a mere $15
million, representing less than four percent of the entire USAID
family]planning account . to be made available to organizations that
declined to accept the policyfs restrictions on the use of private funds.
However, once the president invoked the waiver, which he did soon after
the bill was signed into law, $12.5 million immediately would be
transferred from the family]planning program to the USAID child survival
account.
Further complicating matters, these groups were forced to gcertifyh as a
waiver group . effectively identifying and segregating them from other
organizations that accepted the restrictions. Non]governmental
organizations and pro]choice advocates feared these groups would be
exposed to anti]choice violence and harassment. Interestingly, anti]choice
Sen. Jesse Helms (R]NC) repeatedly requested the names of the gwaiverh
groups, dismissing USAIDfs concerns about confidentiality and safety.
Read more at the URL immediately above.
More reading material on the Bush gag rule on abortion information and
discussion.
<http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=
GGLD,GGLD:2005-17,GGLD:en&q=abortion+and+%22gag+rule%22+and+bush>
A shorter URL for the above link:
< http://tinyurl.com/2a89zg>
<http://books.google.com/books?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=
GGLD,GGLD:2005-17,GGLD:en&q=abortion+and+%
22gag+rule%22+and+bush&um=1&sa=N&tab=wp>
A shorter URL for the above link:
< http://tinyurl.com/28nu2u>
<http://scholar.google.com/scholar?sourceid=navclient&ie=
UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-17,GGLD:en&q=abortion+and+%
22gag+rule%22+and+bush&um=1&sa=N&tab=ps>
A shorter URL for the above link:
< http://tinyurl.com/yupreu>
<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=abortion+and+%
22gag+rule%22+and+bush&btnmeta%3Dsearch%3Dunclesam=
Search+Government+Sites>
A shorter URL for the above link:
< http://tinyurl.com/2ebueo>
Searching abortion in Popline leads now to this result:
No records found by latest query.
Searching the term pregnancy in Popline leads to this result:
Your search found 60696 record(s).
This constitutes censorship and one must wonder if the freedom of speech,
press and information that is protected by the Constituion is not violated
by this policy in regard to the content of POPLINE.
Will Medline be the next United States government database to join this
censorship program?
Sincerely,
David Dillard
<http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html>
--
You are able to search for "abortion law" (without the quotes) as keywords in the Advanced Search and get results that included the word abortion as an index term. I could then click on "abortion" in the record and get results. Typing in "abortion" as a keyword got me nothing. Trying to browse the indexes got me the same results reported here by Jean. If you look under the search tips they do still give "abortion" as a keyword, but it certainly doesn't work when I try it directly.
--
From what I can see they have indeed made abortion a stop word. A search for abortion yielded zero hits.
So then I tried:
pregnan* & terminat*
and I got more than 8,000 hits - many of which had the term abortion right in the title. I think what is happening is that 'abortion law' is appearing in some form of a bound descriptor phrase index. So, the phrase remains searchable since it's not technically in the basic index of the database. The stop words are only 'stopping' the basic index.
--
This development would seem to indicate that United States government censorship authorities not only lack understanding of the role of freedom of speech, discussion and press in a democratic society, they also were not beneficiaries in their learning years of a No Child Left Behind in Academic learning legislative edict in the fields of information literacy and research skills. They certainly missed the class on free text searching, which makes their job of controlling database content and search results so much harder when they seem to lack a basic understanding of how databases work. This administration's study to the test, the parrot model of intellectual development, does not involve understanding of the importance of research information availablity to the public, based upon this administrations killing of PUBSCIENCE, decimation of ERIC as a quality database and education clearinghouse resource along with the attempt to hide and destroy huge quantities of environmental information, a substantial quanity of which may have been in fact destroyed, by dismantling the Environmental Protection Agency libraries, that will now again reopen, but who knows with what in their collections. One almost has to wonder if the famous book 1984 was used as the information literacy textbook for this administration. To add to the fun of searching abortion in a database where that term's use is verboten, I found over 300 hits search the phrase abortion clinics.
1. 306391 [View full record]
Klingberg-Allvin M; Nguyen Thu Nga; Ransjo-Arvidson AB; Johansson A. Perspectives of midwives and doctors on adolescent sexuality and abortion care in Vietnam. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health. 2006; 34 (4) :414-421.
2. 293414 [View full record]
Melgalve I; Lazdane G; Trapenciere I; Shannon C; Bracken H. Knowledge and attitudes about abortion legislation and abortion methods among abortion clients in Latvia. European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care. 2005 Sep; 10 (3) :143-150.
Peer Reviewed
3. 278808 [View full record] Nepalese women flock to newly opened abortion clinic. Reproductive Health Matters. 2004; 12 (24) :217.
Peer Reviewed
4. 276343 [View full record]
Cheng Y; Guo X; Li Y; Li S; Qu A. Repeat induced abortions and contraceptive practices among unmarried young women seeking an abortion in China. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2004 Nov; 87 (2) :199-202.
Peer Reviewed
5. 194179 [View full record]
Dahal K. Legal abortion in Nepal and women in prison. Lancet. 2004 Jun 5; 363 (9424) :1905.
Peer Reviewed
6. 276318 [View full record]
Norman JE; Wu O; Twaddle S; Macmillan S; McMillan L. An evaluation of economics and acceptability of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection, in women attending antenatal, abortion, colposcopy and family planning clinics in Scotland, UK. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2004 Nov; 111 :1261-1268.
Peer Reviewed
7. 192737 [View full record]
Wiebe ER; Janssen PA; Henderson A; Fung I. Ethnic Chinese women's perceptions about condoms, withdrawal and rhythm methods of birth control. Contraception. 2004 Jun; 69 (6) :493-496.
8. 175061 [View full record]
Mohammed I. Issues relating to abortions are complicated in Nigeria [letter] BMJ. British Medical Journal. 2003 Jan 25; 326 (7382) :225.
9. 283954 [View full record]
van Hall EV. Safe abortion is the cornerstone of sound reproductive health [editorial] Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2003 Jun; 24 (2) :69-70.
10. 171910 [View full record]
Associated Press. Court upholds state access to abortion clinic records. New York Times. 2002 Sep 20; :[1] p..
Peer Reviewed
11. 170114 [View full record]
Ban DJ; Kim J; de Silva WI. Induced abortion in Sri Lanka: who goes to providers for pregnancy termination? Journal of Biosocial Science. 2002 Jul; 34 (3) :303-15.
12. 287244 [View full record]
Entman R. Picket fences: analying the court's treatment of restrictions on polling, abortion, and labor picketers. Georgetown Law Journal. 2002 Aug; 90 (8) :2581-2597.
Peer Reviewed
13. 163375 [View full record] Abortion law under review in Thailand. Reproductive Health Matters. 2001 Nov; 9 (18) :185-6.
14. 155446 [View full record]
Charatan F. US abortion clinics and harassed patients win damages. BMJ. British Medical Journal. 2001 Feb 24; 322 (7284) :450.
15. 161552 [View full record]
Chavkin W. Sex, lies, and silence: reproductive health in a hostile environment [editorial] American Journal of Public Health. 2001 Nov; 91 (11) :1739-41.
U.S. Funded Health Search Engine Blocks 'Abortion'
By Sarah Lai Stirland April 03, 2008 | 5:55:57 PM
Categories: Censorship
<http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/a-government-fu.html>
A U.S. government-funded medical information site that bills itself as the world's largest database on reproductive health has quietly begun to block searches on the word "abortion," concealing nearly 25,000 search results.
Called Popline, the search site is run by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Maryland. It's funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, the federal office in charge of providing foreign aid, including health care funding, to developing nations.
The massive database indexes a broad range of reproductive health literature, including titles like "Previous abortion and the risk of low birth weight and preterm births," and "Abortion in the United States: Incidence and access to services, 2005."
But on Thursday, a search on "abortion" was producing only the message "No records found by latest query."
Stephen Goldstein, a spokesman for Johns Hopkins, said he wasn't aware of the censorship, and couldn't immediately comment.
Under a Reagan-era policy revived by President Bush in 2001, USAID denies funding to non-governmental organizations that perform abortions, or that "actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations."
A librarian at the University of California at San Francisco noticed the new censorship on Monday, while carrying out a routine research request on behalf of academics and researchers at the university. The search term had functioned properly as of January.
Puzzled, she contacted the manager of the database, Johns Hopkins' Debbie Dickson, who replied in an April 1st e-mail that the university had recently begun blocking the search term because the database received federal funding.
Sincerely,
David Dillard
<http://www.edu-cyberpg.com/ringleaders/davidd.html>
SIGN UP and GET POSTS DELIVERED TO YOUR EMAIL
ON THIS PAGE....
ARCHIVES
| September, 2008 (11) |
| August, 2008 (43) |
| July, 2008 (71) |
| June, 2008 (65) |
| May, 2008 (124) |
| April, 2008 (103) |
| March, 2008 (57) |
| February, 2008 (94) |
| January, 2008 (102) |
| December, 2007 (113) |
| November, 2007 (274) |
| October, 2007 (47) |
SEARCH THIS BLOG
Navigation
SUBSCRIBE TO CATEGORY FEEDS
Blogroll
ABOUT
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are of the writers personal opinions and do not represent Educational CyberPlayGround™ views in anyway.
© Copyright 2008, edu-cyberpg.com
E-mail
Tag Cloud
Sign In