Women's Views on News |
- The great big pink cancer question
- Changes to doctors’ contracts worse for women
- Remarks on the Day of the Girl Child
| The great big pink cancer question Posted: 12 Oct 2015 09:24 AM PDT
Campaigners From Pink to Prevention want to know if you can remove the Pink Ribbon 'blindfold' and ask the breast cancer charities a rather big question. Why do they persist in refusing to acknowledge the role of environmental and occupational toxicants by ignoring decades of evidence up to the present day on the link between our lifelong (womb to grave) exposures to toxics and the escalating incidence of breast cancer? From Pink to Prevention want to know why breast cancer charities continue to focus solely on 'lifestyle' risk factors such as diet and exercise and ignore the potential 60 per cent of breast cancer cases for which they have no explanation? What about the role of chemical, environmental and occupational exposure in this? Better diagnostics and treatment is not mutually exclusive with looking at how our profoundly polluted environment, homes and workplaces impact on our bodies and health, while also taking into consideration the 'precautionary principle' – ie better safe than sorry. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has said that prevention – which is not the same as early detection – offers the most cost-effective long-term strategy for the control of cancer. So why, From Pink to Prevention want to know, do we not see this reflected in our governments’ cancer plans and strategies? Why is primary prevention – stopping the disease before it starts – not addressed alongside better treatment and care? Why are those with the power to influence decisions on breast cancer policy not acting on what we already know? Join From Pink to Prevention this October in removing the pink ribbon blindfold and asking the breast cancer charities that Big Question. Contact them and ask them why they persist in refusing to acknowledge the role of environmental and occupational toxicants by ignoring decades of evidence up to the present day on the link between our lifelong (womb to grave) exposures to toxics and the escalating incidence of breast cancer. There is an example letter on From Pink to Prevention’s website. This is suggested text only – please feel free to adapt and personalise it. And please send From Pink to Prevention a copy of their response. There are various other helpful actions you can take part in. Do your own blindfold-removing action – in a group or individually – take a photo of whoever is removing the blindfold and share it on your Facebook page or via social media: Twitter From Pink to Prevention on @pink_prevention; find them on Instagram at pink_to_prevention or their Flickr group From Pink to Prevention. You can sign and share their petition and spread the word. You could also sign your organisation up to From Pink to Prevention’s statement. Thanks.  |
| Changes to doctors’ contracts worse for women Posted: 12 Oct 2015 07:26 AM PDT
In recent weeks doctors around the country have been protesting against proposed government changes to junior doctors’ contracts. And last month the British Medical Association (BMA) announced it will be balloting its members to undergo industrial action in response to the proposed changes which are due to take place in August 2016. One issue is the proposed changes to ‘normal’ working hours from Monday-Friday from 7am-7pm to Monday-Saturday from 7am -10pm. The suggestion has been that no overtime will be paid for evening or Saturday work, and many junior doctors have been led to believe this could potentially see their pay reduced by as much as 30 per cent. There have also been fears that the government will cancel safeguards set up to ensure that no junior doctor can work more than 48 hours a week. By losing these safeguards doctors have argued their hours will increase unmanageably, potentially for little or no pay and this in turn could have an adverse effect on their own personal lives – and on patient safety. In addition, the government is proposing to eradicate a scheme called 'pay progression' which means that if you are a junior doctor in a speciality training post your pay will increase incrementally year on year, even if you have been on maternity leave or decided to work part-time to look after your children. This change would also affect people who have taken time out to embark on research or further study. The term 'junior doctor' does not mean just young, recent graduates; many doctors remain as 'junior' well into their thirties, which often coincides with the time women wish to start a family. Eliminating 'pay progression' therefore specifically targets female junior doctors. In an attempt to quell discontent, Jeremy Hunt, the Health Secretary, in a letter sent to the chair of the junior doctor's committee at the BMA on 8 October, and which has now been made public, said: "I have asked NHS Employers to develop the details of the new contract to ensure that the great majority of junior doctors are at least as well paid as they would be now." "I can give an absolute guarantee to junior doctors that this contract will not impose longer hours. No junior doctor working full time will be expected to work on average more than 48 hours a week." And, he went on "…I can give an assurance that nights and Sundays will continue to attract unsocial hours payments. I would be pleased to discuss in negotiations how far plain time working extends on Saturdays." In reviewing Hunt's letter you could be persuaded that junior doctors have nothing to worry about and are in fact standing in the way of progress. But the letter also said "Whilst I want to see an end to automatic annual increments (with pay rises instead based on moving through the stages of training and taking on more responsibility), these changes would be cost neutral, rather than cost saving." Junior doctor Georgie Fozard wrote in Grazia recently: "Under the new contract, once you start having babies, your pay will be frozen and won't progress until you're back in work full time, like a man." And on the BMA website junior doctor Samira Anane said that people like her will be the hardest hit – female junior doctors who have chosen to have a family. But no one just becomes a doctor. Before having a child the majority of female junior doctors will have spent years in medical school, and years working extremely hard in a demanding, tiring job caring for people on a daily basis. It’s a tough job. It is also an extremely valuable and important job. It should therefore be rewarded accordingly, and part of that reward should be appropriate support when doctors choose to have a family. And increasing pay year on year even when the doctor is on maternity leave or reduced hours acknowledges the contribution doctor’s have made and will make. The increase in junior doctor's pay when they are on maternity leave, or have chosen to work part-time to enable them to spend some time with their children, is something that should be applauded – and should not be eradicated. It demonstrates the NHS at its best, a public body seeking to make working arrangements for women in the work place fairer. It is disappointing that the government is choosing to change this. It also sets a terrible example to the private sector; ideally the government should be encouraging fairness in the workplace. For as Fozard said, "If a government is prepared to impose a contract that discriminates against women and mothers, what hope is there for the private sector?!" Having children is not some kind of hobby women choose to take up of their own accord. Men and women both decide to procreate for a plethora of reasons – but why is it always women who are the hardest hit when the decision to do so has been made? Yet again the contribution women make in choosing to raise their children is being ignored, undervalued and unappreciated. The fact that the government is even considering introducing these changes speaks volumes about its attitude to women and how to improve the situation of working women. It is a step backwards for women's equality in the medical profession. And of course it is simply not fair. On its website the BMA says that it wants the following concrete assurance in writing from the Government before it can agree to re-enter negotiations: "No disadvantage for those working less than full time and taking parental leave compared to the current system." It remains to be seen whether or not this government will listen to the BMA and to the medical profession. But one thing is clear – this is not an issue that concerns junior doctors alone, it is an issue that undoubtedly affects everyone in the UK for a variety of reasons.  |
| Remarks on the Day of the Girl Child Posted: 12 Oct 2015 06:15 AM PDT UN Women‘s executive director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, in a statement made to commemorate this year’s International Day of the Girl Child – 11 October 2015 – said: The cadre of 15-year-old girls living today were born at the advent of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) into a world of hope. Not all of those hopes were fulfilled. Many have already dropped out of school to look after family members or take informal work to help support the family. More than 250 million of our 15 year-olds are already married, too many are facing the likelihood of HIV infection, especially given the high unmet needs for family planning. The resulting pregnancies and deliveries remain hazardous; complications are one of the leading causes of death for girls aged 15-19. And every 10 minutes somewhere in the world, an adolescent girl dies by violent means. These, and the generations that follow them, are the young women for whom we are working so hard. We know what stood in the way of the achievement of the high hopes of the MDGs. On 27 September, more than 70 heads of state and government spoke in New York at our "Global Leaders' Meeting for Gender Equality and Women's Empowerment: A Commitment to Action", to emphasise their understanding of the centrality of gender equality, and the empowerment of all women and girls. The leaders of Bangladesh, Georgia, Ireland, Italy, Kenya, Liberia, Malawi, Mozambique, Spain and South Sudan have all specifically committed to ending or supporting the elimination of child marriage or female genital mutilation (FGM). The participation of 140 Member States made this the largest and most influential gathering of world leaders dedicated to achieving gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. This was the watershed between the MDGs and the start of the new 15-year period of the new Agenda for Sustainable Development. We are determined that it will not take another 15 years to bring these girls better chances in life. We are calling for all countries to repeal discriminatory laws that create barriers for girls, whether to attend school, to access the healthcare they need, to qualify for decent jobs and earn equal pay. We are lobbying for governments and employers to offer support and social services that end the reliance on unpaid care work only in order to sustain households. We are calling for investments in infrastructure to be attentive to the needs for water and sanitation, to energy and fuel sources, so that girls do not need to waste their time on fetching drinking-water or firewood, and do not have to miss school for any reason. And we are calling for schools to teach girls the STEM subjects they need to compete with confidence for the jobs of the future. Never before has so much attention been focused with such determination on ending violence against women and girls. Now, not only are the women's movements calling for its end; we are being joined in a rising tide by young men signing up to state their solidarity to end gender inequality, change gender stereotypes and take a stand against violence, which is claiming headlines in every country on a daily basis. From sexual harassment at work to extremist violence, from domestic abuse to campus rape, from trafficking to online cyber-violence. The extent, and the nature of the pervasive violence against women and girls has been made public. We are calling for it to be made completely unacceptable. It was emphasised as a priority by the majority of speakers at the global leaders meeting, and action will follow. We know we have an extraordinarily long way to go to achieve what we want for our 15-year-olds. But they must know that they, and all their siblings, are in the spotlight. 11 October, she concluded, is the day when we focus our attention on the Girl Child, but it is not a day in isolation. It is part of a massive and relentless drive towards a world of equality: a Planet 50-50 by 2030.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |