Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

June-23-04

Unnecessary Pap Smears Administered to 10 Million Women

Approximately 10 million American women who have had hysterectomies are unnecessarily receiving Pap smears, a new study has revealed. The Pap test, which screens for precancerous cells on a woman’s cervix, is needlessly administered to some 69 percent of women who have had their cervixes removed during the hysterectomy operation. Without a cervix, a woman is no longer at risk for cervical cancer. Twenty-two million American women, or one in five women over the age of 18 have had hysterectomies, according to the News-Medical.Net. Researchers caution that women who have had hysterectomies because of cancer or women whose hysterectomies did not include cervix removal are still at risk for cancer and ought to be screened, according to Reuters.

The continued administration of the test for some women means unnecessary cost and discomfort. A test generally costs between $20 to $40, researcher Brenda Sirovich estimated, and involves the uncomfortable procedure of scraping cells from the cervix. If a woman’s cervix has been removed, a doctor will typically scrape vaginal cells, a procedure that researchers call problematic. Vaginal cancer is extremely rare and false positives are fairly high. The unnecessary test can result, therefore, in cancer treatment for a cancer that is not even there, according to the New York Times.

Researchers are puzzled as to why doctors have so doggedly continued to administer the unnecessary exam. In 1996, the US Preventive Services Task Force clarified that the test was no longer necessary for women who have had hysterectomies. The research team claims that “physicians are largely responsible” for the continued testing, but also attributes the testing to screening benchmarks set up by insurance companies or to women’s own demands for the test, according to The Washington Times. Researchers speculate that women who have had hysterectomies may not be aware that they are no longer at risk for cervical cancer, or that they may have been caught up in the enthusiasm for cancer screenings.

DONATE to the Feminist Majority Foundation and support our work for women’s health

Media Resources: New York Times 6/11/04; NewsMedical.net 6/22/04; The Washington Times 6/23/04; Reuters 6/22/04


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
 
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case. UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
 
10/29/2014 North Dakota Supreme Court Upholds Abortion Restrictions - The North Dakota Supreme Court yesterday upheld a set of misguided restrictions on medication abortion, allowing what is effectively a ban on early, non-surgical abortions in the state to go into effect immediately. The decision overturned a lower court order finding the law, known as HB 1297, unconstitutional and permanently blocking its enforcement. . . .