The Cuban Abortion Scheme Debunked (Part 4)

The numbers indicate a complexity of diseases that infants, in the developing world, face in their first months, or even first weeks of life. There is little debate as to what is the best approach in order to reduce infant mortality rates: a broad plan for effective maternal health services. According to the Fetal and Infant Mortality Review (a collaborative effort between the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Maternal and Child Health Bureau and the Health Resources and Services Administration), "[i]nfant mortality is associated with a variety of factors including quality of and access to pregnancy and pediatric health care, socioeconomic conditions, family stressors, the strength of high risk safety nets, the quality of community resources and the cultural competence of local service systems."

Yet, in two studies in 2005, it was found that the most important factor to improve infant mortality rates was the availability of effective and accessible health care for mothers. One study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that initiated an intervention in Pakistan concluded that "[t]raining traditional birth attendants and integrating them into an improved healthcare system were achievable and effective in reducing perinatal mortality." In that same year, a study in the Lancet comparing improved neonatal mortality rates in Brazil from 1982 to 2004, found that "[m]ajor changes in health systems happened in these two decades, of which the most important was the creation of the Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Health System)... ensuring free health care for every citizen. The expansion in health care in [the city of] Pelotas led to more than 98% of pregnant women receiving some antenatal care..."

[Part 5]

The Cuban Abortion Scheme Debunked (Part 3)

According to the most recent report from the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) titled "The ten leading causes of death in countries of the Americas," they confirm that "[a]s might be expected in the less than one year age group [infant category], the leading cause of death in 30 of 31 countries was certain conditions originating in the perinatal period [five months before and one month after birth period]. This was followed by congenital malformations, deformations and chromosomal abnormalities which ranked second..." These second-ranked malformations eventually take their toll in the few following years where "[c]ongenital malformations were highly ranked in 25 countries and the leading cause in both (one to four year old) male and female deaths in Argentina, Costa Rica, Cuba, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay."

According to a 2000 longitudinal study from the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, "in Latin America the proportion of infant deaths attributable to congenital anomalies increased from 2-6 per cent in the 1950s to 12-25 per cent in the early 1990s", and that "[i]n absolute terms... infant mortality attributable to congenital anomalies caused more infant deaths in poorer countries than in wealthier countries." In Cuba, according to PAHO, "63% of [infant] deaths occurred in the neonatal period [first month]. Perinatal disorders, birth defects, sepsis, influenza, pneumonia and accidents accounted for more than 80% of all deaths in this [one year] age group."

It is within this context that we should receive the news about "automatic" abortions following prenatal diagnosis of congenital malformations and if "[a] heart murmur or other serious problems required an abortion", or any other claims made by Dorschner and his single source: Jesús Monzón. Monzón, Dorschner's only source from Cuba who makes the direct accusation of the abortion scheme, was an obstetrician-gynecologist in Pinar del Río before he left in 1995. Dorschner interviews another exiled Cuban doctor, but he is not quoted making the same accusation.

A 2004 study in the journal of Prenatal Diagnosis concluded that "[d]epending on the gestational age and legal situation the counselor is operating in, termination of pregnancy may be one of the options to consider and one that should ALWAYS be raised in discussion" (emphasis added) when dealing with fetal congenital heart disease. In 1998, according to PAHO, the leading cause of infant deaths in the US was due to congenital anomalies.

[Part 4]

The Cuban Abortion Scheme Debunked (Part 2)

After having read numerous health related articles, it seems that these accusations are fraudulent and only support the assumption that many Cuban Americans have an apparent bias towards the Cuban government (which might be justified in some cases) and thus are willing to sacrifice important facts for an immediate and selfish condemnation.

The false argument basically accuses the Cuban government of a deliberate abortion scheme to keep infant mortality rates low. The facts point to the contrary and reveal a complex picture of Cuban society, which undoubtedly is unique among the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean. My argument will focus on directly debunking the myth of the Cuban abortion scheme, and replacing the argument with a more appropriate discussion about women's reproductive health in Latin America and the Caribbean. I hope to provide a more reasonable answer to why Cuban women are getting more abortions and why the infant mortality rate is low.

In plain simple terms, Cuban women have easy access to and see little taboos about abortion, and furthermore, Cuban healthcare provides effective primary care to women, especially prenatal care in comparison to the rest of Latin America and the Caribbean. These two factors, in my opinion, are significant in explaining why the abortion rates are high, fertility rates are low and the infant mortality rate is low, and why Cuba continues to stand out in the health sector among the rest of its neighbors in the Western Hemisphere.

[Part 3]

The Cuban Abortion Scheme Debunked (Part 1)

On January 28, 2007, John Dorschner, health reporter for the Miami Herald, wrote four articles about health care in Cuba and the US. Only one of those articles got immediate attention from some fellow bloggers, especially those who are always looking to condemn the Cuban government and quickly smash any realities that come from that island of controversy. Without question, there are many actions to condemn the Cuban government for, and with good reason, but this time the reaction was based on pure ignorance and apparent bias that is found in some hard-liners writing in the Blogosphere.

The article in question is Dorschner's piece titled "Infant mortality rate in Cuba raises eyebrows", which tries to cast doubt on Cuba's infant mortality statistic. Dorschner writes that "[s]ome doctors say they were told to use any means possible to keep the infant mortality rate low." Dorschner relies on two former Cuban doctors, who are now living in the US, and two academic professors (Cuban studies experts) to support the claim that "abortion is a tool used to keep infant mortality low".

This story in the Blogosphere was met with proud confirmation that "Cuba's much touted free healthcare system is starting to be exposed as the propaganda myth that it is," and also that it "reveals another horror about the Cuban revolution: The forced killing of unborn children in order to hold down the regime's infant mortality rate." Obviously, according to these bloggers, the purpose of this evil scheme is so "the regime and its international apologists can confidently use the infant mortality statistics to counter concerns about Castro's otherwise nasty and oppressive record."

[Part 2]

Miami Herald's Misplaced Priorities

While recently doing research for tomorrow's BIG blog post, I ran into another example of how our local media gives uneven and biased coverage to Cuba-related issues. Now, I'm sure many would say that since we live in Miami, where the Cuban-American population outnumbers other ethnic groups, that the public is entitled to a larger coverage of Cuba-related news. Well, I agree on that point. Where I disagree is on the biased coverage of Cuba-related stories, and unfair coverage in comparison to much more important national news.

This seems like a personal grievance, but allow me to present a clear example.

I was recently shocked to see that on December 6, 2006, the Miami Herald devoted only 433 words to the latest report on health in the US, while on January 17, 2007, the Herald devoted 1120 words to continued speculation on Fidel Castro's health.

This is an astonishing example of how priorities at the Miami Herald are gravely misplaced.

John Dorschner, health reporter for the Herald, essentially wrote a very brief summary of the annual report titled "America's Health Ranking's." This report, compiled by the United Health Foundation, the American Public Health Association, Partnership for Prevention and other collaborations, is perhaps the most detailed report on the nation's health. Dorschner's piece titled "Florida drops a spot to No. 41 for healthcare", which appeared nicely on top of page 6A, but dominated by the presence of New York's ban on trans fat, saved only the last few paragraphs to describe the real impact of the report: that the nation's health has "stagnated" since 2000, obesity levels are "alarming", and that the US has fallen behind international health standards among the industrialized nations.

Yet, on January 17, 2007, John Dorschner and Nancy San Martin devoted 1120 words to a story on Fidel Castro's intestines, based on anonymous sources from Spain of course. This is tragic. Why couldn't it have been the other way around, with the nation's health receiving 1120 words instead of 433?

Why hadn't the nation's health appear on the front page that day, while a piece on how Hugo Chavez uses Jesus Christ as a socialist inspiration does? Actually, what should have happened was that the Chavez piece, which was 336 words, should have been scrapped, and the nation's health should have been given its appropriate space on the front, and with 769 words total to better summarize the health report.

There's no excuse for such unfair coverage.

A Terrorist's Veil of Innocence (Part 2)

Radio Mambi (WAQI), the most listened to Spanish AM radio station in South Florida, is constantly praising Carriles and letting callers believe that he is an innocent man. On January 12 (2007), Armando Perez-Roura invited Ernesto Diaz Rodriguez, secretary general of Alpha 66, to speak out against the recent indictments against Luis Posada Carriles. Rodriguez spoke of Carriles as "a man whose only proven crime has been loyalty to the United States and to have fought with courage and tenacity to free Cuba, his enslaved homeland."[*]

This is coming from a man who, according to the Cuban government, was part of an exile mercenary group and was imprisoned in Cuba for 22 years on charges of participating in terrorism operations in 1968. Yet, after all that time, he still speaks of "el sagrado compromiso" (the sacred pledge) "to fight (or struggle) to free Cuba without counting on anybody, nor asking permission from anyone, whatever the price may be."

This is the prevailing rhetoric supporting Carriles and of those who call for his release in Miami.

In reality, there is plenty of evidence against Carriles for his complicity in the Cubana airline bombing of 1976. He even has his own section of declassified documents at the National Security Archive which shows that he was a primary suspect by US intelligence before and after the bombing.

You can also read about how he escaped from prison with the help of Cuban American exiles in Miami. Carriles was interviewed extensively by reporter Ann Louise Bardach on several occasions, and she writes that "Posada acknowledged that he might well still be in jail if friends, such as Jorge Mas Canosa, had not come to his rescue."

He may be a freedom fighter to some in Miami, but he's definitely NOT INNOCENT.

[*]Ernesto Diaz Rodriguez - Radio Mambi: "En Caliente" Morning Show (January 12, 2007)

A Terrorist's Veil of Innocence (Part 1)

One false notion that is constantly heard and repeated is that Luis Posada Carriles is innocent because he has been "twice acquitted" for his crimes. These so-called "acquittals" relate to charges against Carriles, in which he was a primary suspect, for the bombing of a civilian aircraft in 1976.

Currently, Luis Posada Carriles is being held in a US federal prison for charges of fraud connected to his illegal entrance and false immigrant application into the US. And, just this morning in Miami, cries of injustice continue to be called out on the radio. Callers to Radio Mambi, one of Carriles' main supporters for his release, ask Armando Perez-Roura on his morning show: where's justice for this freedom fighter who was already aquitted for his crimes? And, there's a silence. It's a silence that belongs to those baffled with simple logic, based on a false premise. One of the hosts on Radio Mambi's morning show, Enrique Encinosa, responds that there is a lot international pressure in the case of Carriles, but mainly that "para los communistas no importa"[*](it doesn't matter to the Communists) if Carriles has been aquitted.

The truth is that Luis Posada Carriles has NOT been aquitted. Yet, it seems that THIS doesn't matter to Enrique Encinosa, and others who believe that Carriles is an innocent man.

The best clarification of Carriles' false "veil of innocence" has come from the Council on Hemispheric Affairs. They write that:

"Posada was first tried before a military tribunal, which acquitted him of the crime of treason. However, a higher military court found that the lower one lacked jurisdiction and annulled the entire case, which was then handed off to the civil courts. They would have prima facie jurisdiction over Posada, as he was at the time a citizen of Venezuela. Initially, the prosecutors in the civil case declined to try him; their replacements, however, saw fit to bring homicide charges against Posada, and it was during this period that he escaped from prison.

"To Posada’s potential benefit, many have interpreted this lack of a verdict to mean that two Venezuelan courts have found him innocent of terrorism. However, neither of the legal actions against him carried any precedential effect. The military tribunal annulment effectively wiped the slate clean, resetting the entire judicial process and leaving all parties situated as if no legal action had ever occurred.

"In the final analysis, Posada was in the process of facing prosecution for a major crime at the time when he escaped from Venezuela."

This description is supported by the official statements of the Venezuelan Embassy in the US. They say:

"The history of the litigation in Venezuela that shows that after litigation in the military tribunals, the case was annulled on March 24, 1983, because it was conducted in the wrong forum. Subsequently, it was sent to the penal courts where, prior to a verdict by the court, Posada escaped from prison in San Juan de los Morros in Guárico state on August 18, 1985... The statutory period for trying the case has not lapsed, because according to Article 110 of the Penal Code, the statute of limitation is tolled for a fugitive until a new legal action is taken."

This is why the Venezuelan government continues to demand for the extradition of Luis Posada Carriles from the US, who together have extradition obligations to fulfill. This demand for extradition was also supported by virtually all the countries in Latin America at the 2005 Ibero-American Summit where they agreed on such a resolution.

The case of Luis Posada Carriles is pretty clear in Latin America: he's a terrorist that should be extradited and tried for his charges in Venezuela. But, here in Miami, its a totally different story.

[*]Enrique Encinosa - Radio Mambi: "En Caliente" Morning Show (February 1, 2007)