The Right to Pelvic Exam Alternatives

For virgins, rape victims, and the sexually abused going for their yearly pelvic exam is horrifying. A girl who has been through a traumatic experience or has been told that any sexual touching should be done with someone they love and trust may be shocked when she goes into a doctors office for protection and is asked to remove her clothing. These exams can lead to more injury than psychological, such as vaginal tearing, burst hymens, and bruised bladders if done hastily. Most of the side effects of birth control are strokes, blood clots, and often increases risks to cervical cancer. The increased risk to cancer is why doctors choose to require the pelvic exam and the PAP smear. Unfortunately, this invasive procedure scares many girls away from getting contraceptives and puts them at risk for pregnancy.

In other countries such as China use a CSA blood test that some believe to be even more effective that a pelvic exam. DR-70 is a simple blood test that can also detect it. Verbal questionnaires can eliminate the need to look for skin cancer, which can often hide in the nether regions. Urine samples can be used to test for cervical cancer and HPV. There are also personal vaginal swabs or a Self Pap that can be used in the bathroom and then given to the doctor to replace the PAP smear. Some places offer lessons in self pelvic exams, These are all alternatives that should be offered as alternatives to receive birth control.

For legal information see below.

%u201CYou have the right to refuse a treatment, as permitted by law. You can refuse treatment and still receive alternative care%u201D (%u201CThe Patient's%u201D).

%u201C'In 1965, the Supreme Court acknowledged the existence of a fundamental constitutional right for married people to purchase and use contraception.[28] In 1972, the Court extended this right to unmarried individuals, expanding it from one of marital privacy to one of reproductive privacy.[29] The result was a fundamental right of access to contraceptives, free from unjustified governmental interference, in order to control reproduction.[30] The Court famously held that %u201C[i]f the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual . . . to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child'%u201D[31](Dixon).

%u201CThe Supreme Court has held that the individual has a dignity interest in bodily integrity.[40] This principle is %u201Cdeeply embedded in our . . . constitutional traditions.%u201D[41] The prominence of the fundamental right to bodily integrity within the context of substantive due process privacy rights is highlighted by Roe v. Wade[42] and Planned Parenthood v. Casey,[43] both of which discuss the importance of a woman%u2019s right to bodily integrity in relation to the government%u2019s interests in protecting life and health%u201D (Dixon).

%u201CA competent person has a liberty interest under the Due Process Clause in refusing unwanted medical treatment. Cf., e.g., Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 24 -30%u201D(%u201CCruzan%u201D).

%u201CCRUZAN, BY HER PARENTS AND CO-GUARDIANS CRUZAN ET UX.
v. DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI
No. 88-1503.%u201D Find Law, 25 June 1990. Web. 9 February 2011. <http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=497&invol=261>

Dixon, Heather S. %u201CPELVIC EXAM PREREQUISITE TO HORMONAL CONTRACEPTIVES: UNJUSTIFIED INFRINGEMENT ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, GOVERNMENTAL COERCION, AND BAD PUBLIC POLICY.%u201D Harvard Journal of Law and Gender, 15 November 2004. Web. 9 February 2011. <http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol27/dixon.php>

%u201CThe Patient's Bill of Right Act.%u201D American Hospital Association. Web. 9 February, 2011. <http://www.allsands.com/health/advice/patientsbillof_vpt_gn.htm>