<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>AWARE-LA &#187; Selene Kaye, Women&#8217;s Rights Project</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.awarela.org/author/selene-kaye-womens-rights-project/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.awarela.org</link>
	<description>Alliance of White Anti-Racists Everywhere - Los Angeles</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:44:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Who Owns Your Genes? You Do. originally posted by Selene Kaye, Women&#039;s Rights Project for Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union [click here]</title>
		<link>http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech-womens-rights/who-owns-your-genes-you-do</link>
		<comments>http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech-womens-rights/who-owns-your-genes-you-do#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Selene Kaye, Women's Rights Project</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[brca]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">21886 at http://www.aclu.org</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>On Monday, federal district court Judge Robert Sweet made  history by issuing the first <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-technology-and-liberty-womens-rights/association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-et-al">ruling</a> ever that human genes can&#8217;t be patented.</p>
<p>The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has been issuing <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/brca-genes-and-patents#03">patents on  human genes</a> for over 20 years, giving private corporations, individuals,  and universities <em>exclusive  rights</em> to those genes and to test, study, or even look at them.  This is the first time a court has said that this practice is unlawful.</p>
<p>Late Monday afternoon, the judge issued his decision in  our breast cancer gene patents <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/aclu-challenges-patents-breast-cancer-genes-0">lawsuit</a>,  which challenges the government&#8217;s granting of and Myriad Genetics&#8217; control of  patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 human genes, which are associated with breast  and ovarian cancer.</p>
<p>The judge declared that <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/us-patent-claims-challenged-association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-">all  15 patent claims that we challenged are invalid</a>, based on the fact that they  cover products of nature and abstract ideas. He wrote in his <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-technology-and-liberty-womens-rights/association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-et-al">decision</a>:</p>
<blockquote>The  resolution of these motions is based upon long recognized principles of  molecular biology and genetics:  DNA represents the physical embodiment of  biological information, distinct in its essential characteristics from any  other chemical found in nature.  It is concluded that DNA&#8217;s existence in  an &#8220;isolated&#8221; form alters neither this fundamental quality of DNA as it exists  in the body nor the information it encodes.  Therefore, the patents at  issue directed to &#8220;isolated DNA&#8221; containing sequences found in nature are  unsustainable as a matter of law and are deemed unpatentable subject matter  under 35 U.S.C. &#167; 101.</blockquote>
<p>(You can read more about our legal arguments <a href="http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech-womens-rights/first-federal-court-hearing-whether-human-genes-should-be-patented">here</a> and <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/brca-memo-law-further-support-plaintiffs-msj-and-opposition-myriad-and-usp">here</a>.)</p>
<p>The judge ruled that Myriad&#8217;s claim &#8212; that the &#8220;isolation&#8221;  of the BRCA genes from the surrounding DNA makes them into something distinct  and patentable &#8212; is fundamentally flawed and nothing more than semantics:</p>
<blockquote>Many,  however, including scientists in the field of molecular biology and genomics,  have considered this practice a &#8220;lawyer&#8217;s trick&#8221; that circumvents the  prohibitions on the direct patenting of the DNA in our bodies but which, in  practice, reaches the same result.</blockquote>
<p>This is a huge victory for women&#8217;s health and scientific  freedom. Myriad has already said that they will appeal, but if this decision is  upheld, it will mean that the thousands of researchers and clinicians who have  the ability to conduct BRCA testing and provide results to women, will no  longer be prohibited from doing so. This could well mean that the price of this  test will come down, making it accessible to many women for whom the current  cost (Myriad charges over $3,000) is prohibitive. It would also mean that our  six individual women <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/brca-plaintiff-biographies">plaintiffs</a> and the thousands of other women affected by hereditary breast and ovarian  cancer can more freely access critical information about their own genetics,  such as getting a second opinion before taking drastic preventative measures  like mastectomy or having their ovaries removed. Finally, it would mean that  the PTO would change its policy and no longer issue patents on human genes.</p>
<p>The judge noted the significance of his decision:</p>
<blockquote>The  resolution of the issues presented to this Court deeply concerns breast cancer  patients, medical professionals, researchers, caregivers, advocacy groups,  existing gene patent holders and their investors, and those seeking to advance  public health.</blockquote>
<p>Because our lawsuit challenges the whole notion of gene  patenting, this decision could have far-reaching effects beyond the BRCA genes.  Approximately <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/39556res20090512.html#04">20 percent</a> of all human genes have been patented, including genes associated with  Alzheimer's disease, muscular dystrophy, colon cancer, asthma, and many other  illnesses.</p>
<p>This is a moment of triumph for our plaintiffs, but the  fight is not over. Stay tuned, and if you haven&#8217;t already, be sure to watch a  <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech_womens-rights/liberate-breast-cancer-genes">video of our plaintiffs</a> and sign a message of support for them at <a href="http://www.aclu.org/brca">www.aclu.org/brca</a>.</p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On Monday, federal district court Judge Robert Sweet made  history by issuing the first <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-technology-and-liberty-womens-rights/association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-et-al">ruling</a> ever that human genes can&rsquo;t be patented.</p>
<p>The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has been issuing <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/brca-genes-and-patents#03">patents on  human genes</a> for over 20 years, giving private corporations, individuals,  and universities <em>exclusive  rights</em> to those genes and to test, study, or even look at them.  This is the first time a court has said that this practice is unlawful.</p>
<p>Late Monday afternoon, the judge issued his decision in  our breast cancer gene patents <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/aclu-challenges-patents-breast-cancer-genes-0">lawsuit</a>,  which challenges the government&rsquo;s granting of and Myriad Genetics&rsquo; control of  patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 human genes, which are associated with breast  and ovarian cancer.</p>
<p>The judge declared that <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/us-patent-claims-challenged-association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-">all  15 patent claims that we challenged are invalid</a>, based on the fact that they  cover products of nature and abstract ideas. He wrote in his <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-technology-and-liberty-womens-rights/association-molecular-pathology-et-al-v-uspto-et-al">decision</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>The  resolution of these motions is based upon long recognized principles of  molecular biology and genetics:  DNA represents the physical embodiment of  biological information, distinct in its essential characteristics from any  other chemical found in nature.  It is concluded that DNA&rsquo;s existence in  an &ldquo;isolated&rdquo; form alters neither this fundamental quality of DNA as it exists  in the body nor the information it encodes.  Therefore, the patents at  issue directed to &ldquo;isolated DNA&rdquo; containing sequences found in nature are  unsustainable as a matter of law and are deemed unpatentable subject matter  under 35 U.S.C. &sect; 101.</p></blockquote>
<p>(You can read more about our legal arguments <a href="http://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech-womens-rights/first-federal-court-hearing-whether-human-genes-should-be-patented">here</a> and <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech-womens-rights/brca-memo-law-further-support-plaintiffs-msj-and-opposition-myriad-and-usp">here</a>.)</p>
<p>The judge ruled that Myriad&rsquo;s claim &mdash; that the &ldquo;isolation&rdquo;  of the BRCA genes from the surrounding DNA makes them into something distinct  and patentable &mdash; is fundamentally flawed and nothing more than semantics:</p>
<blockquote><p>Many,  however, including scientists in the field of molecular biology and genomics,  have considered this practice a &ldquo;lawyer&rsquo;s trick&rdquo; that circumvents the  prohibitions on the direct patenting of the DNA in our bodies but which, in  practice, reaches the same result.</p></blockquote>
<p>This is a huge victory for women&rsquo;s health and scientific  freedom. Myriad has already said that they will appeal, but if this decision is  upheld, it will mean that the thousands of researchers and clinicians who have  the ability to conduct BRCA testing and provide results to women, will no  longer be prohibited from doing so. This could well mean that the price of this  test will come down, making it accessible to many women for whom the current  cost (Myriad charges over $3,000) is prohibitive. It would also mean that our  six individual women <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/brca-plaintiff-biographies">plaintiffs</a> and the thousands of other women affected by hereditary breast and ovarian  cancer can more freely access critical information about their own genetics,  such as getting a second opinion before taking drastic preventative measures  like mastectomy or having their ovaries removed. Finally, it would mean that  the PTO would change its policy and no longer issue patents on human genes.</p>
<p>The judge noted the significance of his decision:</p>
<blockquote><p>The  resolution of the issues presented to this Court deeply concerns breast cancer  patients, medical professionals, researchers, caregivers, advocacy groups,  existing gene patent holders and their investors, and those seeking to advance  public health.</p></blockquote>
<p>Because our lawsuit challenges the whole notion of gene  patenting, this decision could have far-reaching effects beyond the BRCA genes.  Approximately <a href="http://www.aclu.org/freespeech/gen/39556res20090512.html#04">20 percent</a> of all human genes have been patented, including genes associated with  Alzheimer&#8217;s disease, muscular dystrophy, colon cancer, asthma, and many other  illnesses.</p>
<p>This is a moment of triumph for our plaintiffs, but the  fight is not over. Stay tuned, and if you haven&rsquo;t already, be sure to watch a  <a href="http://www.aclu.org/free-speech_womens-rights/liberate-breast-cancer-genes">video of our plaintiffs</a> and sign a message of support for them at <a href="http://www.aclu.org/brca">www.aclu.org/brca</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.awarela.org/2010/03/30/who-owns-your-genes-you-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Revaluing &#8220;Women&#8217;s Work:&#8221; Ending the Exploitation and Abuse of Domestic Workers originally posted by Selene Kaye, Women&#039;s Rights Project for Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union [click here]</title>
		<link>http://www.aclu.org/blog/womens-rights/revaluing-womens-work-ending-exploitation-and-abuse-domestic-workers</link>
		<comments>http://www.aclu.org/blog/womens-rights/revaluing-womens-work-ending-exploitation-and-abuse-domestic-workers#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Selene Kaye, Women's Rights Project</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">21658 at http://www.aclu.org</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A reminder to those of you in the New York  area to join us <strong>tomorrow</strong> at the U.N.  Commission on the Status of Women for a film screening and discussion about the  human rights of domestic workers.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/un-commission-status-women-2010"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" src="http://www.aclu.org/files/images/womensrights/cedaw_2010_225.jpg" alt="" /></a>   For decades, nannies, caregivers, and  housekeepers have been excluded from most U.S. labor protections &#8211; a legacy  of slavery, Jim Crow, and the undervaluation of &#34;women's work.&#34; The  lack of regula&#173;tion combined with the isolated nature of domestic work makes  these women particularly vulnerable to human rights abuses, breeding the global  phenomenon of human trafficking.</p>
<p>As the <em>U.N. Commission on the Status  of Women </em>undertakes a 15-year review of  the implementation of the <a href="http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/declar.htm">Beijing  Declaration and Platform for Action</a>, this public forum will call  attention to the failure of the U.S. and other governments to live up to their  obligations under interna&#173;tional human rights law to protect this critical  workforce.</p>
<p>The event will begin with a screening of <em><a href="http://behindcloseddoors2009.wordpress.com/">Behind Closed Doors</a></em>,  a short documentary film about the exploitation and labor trafficking of South  Asian women as domestic workers in the United States.&#160; The filmmakers, Pracheta Sharma and Jessica  Hopper, will introduce the film, which will be followed by a panel discussion  with domestic workers and advocates engaged in local, national, and  international movements to protect the human rights of domestic workers and  re-value their labor.</p>
<blockquote><strong>What:</strong> <a href="http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/womensrights/revaluing2010_flier.pdf">Revaluing  &#34;Women's Work:&#34; Ending the Exploitation and Abuse of Domestic Workers</a>   <strong><br />
When:</strong> Thursday, March 11, 2010 at 6:00pm   <strong><br />
Where:</strong> U.N. Church Center,  10th Floor, 777 U.N. Plaza (44th St. and First Ave.), New York, NY   <br />
<strong>This event is free and open to the public.</strong></blockquote>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A reminder to those of you in the New York  area to join us <strong>tomorrow</strong> at the U.N.  Commission on the Status of Women for a film screening and discussion about the  human rights of domestic workers.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/un-commission-status-women-2010"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" src="http://www.aclu.org/files/images/womensrights/cedaw_2010_225.jpg" alt="" /></a>   For decades, nannies, caregivers, and  housekeepers have been excluded from most U.S. labor protections &ndash; a legacy  of slavery, Jim Crow, and the undervaluation of &quot;women&#8217;s work.&quot; The  lack of regula&shy;tion combined with the isolated nature of domestic work makes  these women particularly vulnerable to human rights abuses, breeding the global  phenomenon of human trafficking.</p>
<p>As the <em>U.N. Commission on the Status  of Women </em>undertakes a 15-year review of  the implementation of the <a href="http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/declar.htm">Beijing  Declaration and Platform for Action</a>, this public forum will call  attention to the failure of the U.S. and other governments to live up to their  obligations under interna&shy;tional human rights law to protect this critical  workforce.</p>
<p>The event will begin with a screening of <em><a href="http://behindcloseddoors2009.wordpress.com/">Behind Closed Doors</a></em>,  a short documentary film about the exploitation and labor trafficking of South  Asian women as domestic workers in the United States.&nbsp; The filmmakers, Pracheta Sharma and Jessica  Hopper, will introduce the film, which will be followed by a panel discussion  with domestic workers and advocates engaged in local, national, and  international movements to protect the human rights of domestic workers and  re-value their labor.</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>What:</strong> <a href="http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/womensrights/revaluing2010_flier.pdf">Revaluing  &quot;Women&#8217;s Work:&quot; Ending the Exploitation and Abuse of Domestic Workers</a>   <strong><br />
When:</strong> Thursday, March 11, 2010 at 6:00pm   <strong><br />
Where:</strong> U.N. Church Center,  10th Floor, 777 U.N. Plaza (44th St. and First Ave.), New York, NY   <br />
<strong>This event is free and open to the public.</strong></p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.awarela.org/2010/03/10/revaluing-womens-work-ending-the-exploitation-and-abuse-of-domestic-workers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
