Kenya hospital imprisons new mothers with no money


NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — The director of the Pumwani Maternity Hospital, located in a hardscrabble neighborhood of downtown Nairobi, freely acknowledges what he's accused of: detaining mothers who can't pay their bills. Lazarus Omondi says it's the only way he can keep his medical center running.


Two mothers who live in a mud-wall and tin-roof slum a short walk from the maternity hospital, which is affiliated with the Nairobi City Council, told The Associated Press that Pumwani wouldn't let them leave after delivering their babies. The bills the mothers couldn't afford were $60 and $160. Guards would beat mothers with sticks who tried to leave without paying, one of the women said.


Now, a New York-based group has filed a lawsuit on the women's behalf in hopes of forcing Pumwani to stop the practice, a practice Omondi is candid about.


"We hold you and squeeze you until we get what we can get. We must be self-sufficient," Omondi said in an interview in his hospital office. "The hospital must get money to pay electricity, to pay water. We must pay our doctors and our workers."


"They stay there until they pay. They must pay," he said of the 350 mothers who give birth each week on average. "If you don't pay the hospital will collapse."


The Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the suit this month in the High Court of Kenya, says detaining women for not paying is illegal. Pumwani is associated with the Nairobi City Council, one reason it might be able to get away with such practices, and the patients are among Nairobi's poorest with hardly anyone to stand up for them.


Maimouna Awuor was an impoverished mother of four when she was to give birth to her fifth in October 2010. Like many who live in Nairobi's slums, Awuor performs odd jobs in the hopes of earning enough money to feed her kids that day. Awuor, who is named in the lawsuit, says she had saved $12 and hoped to go to a lower-cost clinic but was turned away and sent to Pumwani. After giving birth, she couldn't pay the $60 bill, and was held with what she believes was about 60 other women and their infants.


"We were sleeping three to a bed, sometimes four," she said. "They abuse you, they call you names," she said of the hospital staff.


She said saw some women tried to flee but they were beaten by the guards and turned back. While her husband worked at a faraway refugee camp, Awuor's 9-year-old daughter took care of her siblings. A friend helped feed them, she said, while the children stayed in the family's 50-square-foot shack, where rent is $18 a month. She says she was released after 20 days after Nairobi's mayor paid her bill. Politicians in Kenya in general are expected to give out money and get a budget to do so.


A second mother named in the lawsuit, Margaret Anyoso, says she was locked up in Pumwani for six days in 2010 because she could not pay her $160 bill. Her pregnancy was complicated by a punctured bladder and heavy bleeding.


"I did not see my child until the sixth day after the surgery. The hospital staff were keeping her away from me and it was only when I caused a scene that they brought her to me," said Anyoso, a vegetable seller and a single mother with five children who makes $5 on a good day.


Anyoso said she didn't have clothes for her child so she wrapped her in a blood-stained blouse. She was released after relatives paid the bill.


One woman says she was detained for nine months and was released only after going on a hunger strike. The Center for Reproductive Rights says other hospitals also detain non-paying patients.


Judy Okal, the acting Africa director for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said her group filed the lawsuit so all Kenyan women, regardless of socio-economic status, are able to receive health care without fear of imprisonment. The hospital, the attorney general, the City Council of Nairobi and two government ministries are named in the suit.


___


Associated Press reporter Tom Odula contributed to this report.


Read More..

With hours remaining, fiscal deal uncertain


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The chances of a deal to prevent the economy from tumbling over a "fiscal cliff" remained uncertain on Sunday as lawmakers haggled over how to prevent taxes for all Americans from rising on New Year's Day.


Aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell worked on a compromise to stop automatic tax hikes for most Americans on January 1. Any agreement needs to be rushed through both chambers of Congress before midnight on Monday.


One Democratic Senate aide said it was uncertain whether the leaders would reach an accord. Reid and McConnell had been aiming to have an agreement by 3 p.m. EST (2000 GMT) so that they could present it to previously scheduled closed-door meetings of their party colleagues.


"It is going to be difficult," the aide said. Senate Chaplain Barry Black opened a rare Sunday session of the chamber with a plea to God for lawmakers to avoid damaging the economy through their squabbling.


"Look with favor on our nation and save us from self-inflicted wounds," Black said in a prayer.


If the politicians cannot agree, then tax increases and across-the-board government spending cuts will begin on January 1. That would take $600 billion out of the economy, push unemployment up and curb federal spending.


The main focus of negotiations was tax hikes on the wealthy, an increase sought by President Barack Obama but opposed by Republicans, particularly fiscal conservatives in the House of Representatives.


Obama made a rare appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" to pressure lawmakers into forging a deal.


Senators appearing on other Sunday morning shows expressed optimism that an agreement could be reached.


"Well, there are certainly no breakthroughs yet between Senator McConnell and Senator Reid, but there's a real possibility of a deal," Senator Charles Schumer, a Democrat from New York, said on the ABC program "This Week."


"I don't disagree with Chuck," said Senator Jon Kyl, a Republican from Arizona.


Another Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, conceded that an agreement would end up raising income taxes on the wealthy, thus sparing the rest of the country from the looming income tax hikes.


"President Obama is going to get tax rate increases. The president won," Graham tweeted, echoing earlier comments he made on "Fox News Sunday." He told the show that the chances of a bipartisan deal before the New Year's deadline were "exceedingly good."


Obama has alternatively offered Republicans a deal to increase income taxes for households earning over $250,000 a year, and over $400,000 a year.


A White House aide said the president and his staff had been in touch with congressional leaders throughout the weekend.


Any deal on taxes in the Senate might meet resistance in the House from conservative Republicans.


OBAMA JUMPS IN


On NBC, Obama warned of the fallout in financial markets if the two sides did not reach an agreement.


"If people start seeing that on January 1st this problem still hasn't been solved, that we haven't seen the kind of deficit reduction that we could have, had the Republicans been willing to take the deal that I gave them ... then obviously that's going to have an adverse reaction in the markets," Obama said, adding that he had offered Republicans significant compromises that had been rejected repeatedly.


He said he would avoid tax increases for most Americans, even if the talks fall apart.


"If Republicans do in fact decide to block it, so that taxes on middle class families do in fact go up on January 1st, then we'll come back with a new Congress on January 4th and the first bill that will be introduced on the floor will be to cut taxes on middle class families," Obama said.


John Boehner, the speaker of the House of Representatives, rejected Obama's accusations that Republicans were not being amenable to compromise.


"The president's comments today are ironic, as a recurring theme of our negotiations was his unwillingness to agree to anything that would require him to stand up to his own party," Boehner, who has had trouble convincing his Republican colleagues to support his own proposals, said in a statement.


"The president has continued to insist on a package skewed dramatically in favor of higher taxes that would destroy jobs. We've been reasonable and responsible. The president is the one who has never been able to get to ‘yes.'"


The Senate - where the Democrats hold sway - began a session beginning at 1 p.m. EST (1800 GMT), but it was not clear whether the chamber would have fiscal-cliff legislation to act upon.


The Republican-controlled House also returns on Sunday and can vote on any deal in the evening if need be.


(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria, Fred Barbash and Richard Cowan. Writing by Alistair Bell, Editing by Jackie Frank)



Read More..

Russian Acquittal Escalates Human Rights Feud With U.S.





MOSCOW — A judge issued an acquittal on Friday of the only official to have gone to trial in Russia in the case of Sergei L. Magnitsky, a lawyer whose death in prison three years ago inspired the United States Congress to pass a law addressing human rights abuses in Russia.




The official, Dr. Dmitry Kratov, the former head of the medical service at Butyrka Prison, where Mr. Magnitsky had been held, was accused of negligence for refusing repeated requests for treatment for a life-threatening illness.


Charges against another doctor had been dismissed earlier, elevating the significance of Dr. Kratov’s trial, coming just weeks after Congress passed the Magnitsky Act, which was critical of the Russian courts for failing to prosecute any suspects in the lawyer’s death.


But far from pursuing the case, prosecutors announced at a hearing on Monday that they would no longer press for a conviction and instead asked the judge, Tatiana Neverova, to acquit Dr. Kratov.


That reversal came four days after President Vladimir V. Putin said at a news conference that Mr. Magnitsky had died of natural causes, a statement that a lawyer for the family said had sent a message to prosecutors to drop the case.


In granting the prosecutor’s request for an acquittal, Judge Neverova also indicated that Dr. Kratov could sue the government for damages under a Russian law related to illegal prosecution, Interfax reported. Dr. Kratov told journalists at the Tverskoi Court that he had not decided whether to sue.


The judge said she had seen no evidence in the course of the proceedings incriminating Dr. Kratov or convincing her that any connection existed between his actions and Mr. Magnitsky’s death, Interfax reported.


Dr. Kratov was the only person on a list of 60 Russian officials implicated in the Magnitsky case by the United States Helsinki Commission to have stood trial in Russia. Fewer than 1 percent of suspects are acquitted in Russian criminal trials.


Nikolai Gorokhov, a lawyer representing the Magnitsky family, said that Dr. Kratov had signed documents refusing Mr. Magnitsky’s request to be moved to an infirmary and that he had been aware of a diagnosis of pancreatitis and gallstones five days before Mr. Magnitsky death.


In the United States, the Magnitsky Act bans suspects like Dr. Kratov from entering the country and freezes assets in the American banking system.


In retaliation, Mr. Putin signed the Dmitri Yakovlev Act on Friday, named for a Russian child adopted in the United States who died after being forgotten in a hot car. The law bans Americans from adopting Russian orphans because of cases of abuse like Dmitri’s.


Mr. Magnitsky’s employer, the hedge fund Hermitage Capital, issued a statement Friday calling the ruling “a total miscarriage of justice.”


“There is no doubt that people responsible for Magnitsky’s death are being protected by the president of Russia,” the statement said. “Now that President Putin is personally involved in the obstruction of justice in a major case of extrajudicial killing, he will have to face the consequences of his actions.”


Read More..

The Boy Genius Report: The Wii U is the Nintendo’s last console






I remember it still — people flipped out about the Nintendo (NTDOY) Wii. Yes, its name was mocked for a while, but there was genuine excitement around what Nintendo was doing with motion and the entire gameplay experience. While the original Nintendo Wii was almost an Apple (AAPL)-like product — Nintendo focused on the gameplay and not on specs; the company didn’t even have HD graphics when every other console did — the Nintendo Wii U clearly demonstrates how far Nintendo has fallen and how out of touch the company is.


[More from BGR: Samsung could face $ 15 billion fine for trying to ban iPhone, other Apple devices]






I bought a Nintendo Wii U for one reason and one reason only, and that’s to play and beat “Super Mario Bros. U.” I’ll probably end up returning the console after I’m done, because that’s how horrible the Wii U actually is.


[More from BGR: Five-year-old finds porn on refurbished Nintendo 3DS from GameStop]


First of all, the fact that Nintendo actually decided to ship this joke of a controller called the GamePad with a 6.2-inch touchscreen in the middle says it all. It only lasted for around two hours per charge over the week I’ve used it, and it’s big, clunky and made of glossy Nintendo plastic. The problem it, it has no charm. It feels thrown together to try to make a statement, one that says that Nintendo isn’t afraid of the iPads or Android tablets or iPhones or iPod touches, and that it too can take on touch just as it took on motion.


It fails miserably. And that’s just the controller.


The actual console is one that finally for the first time ever supports HDMI and HD graphics, yet Nintendo’s flagship game doesn’t look good in high-definition. The console’s UI is a mess, and let’s be honest, we are living in a time where we are so connected, where so much is shared across continents instantly, that real design transcends what country it was designed in.


When you see a beautiful iPhone app’s interface, there’s a good chance you couldn’t tell if it was designed by a company in San Francisco or Paris or Hong Kong. But Nintendo’s interface is blatantly Japanese, and it lacks any and all sophistication. It’s like all of Nintendo’s designers just gave up and are living in a time when Apple’s iOS devices and Google’s (GOOG) Android devices don’t exist, blissfully ignoring the threat that their company is facing from all angles.


The Wii U experience is so terrible that it took over an hour to update the software on the console recently, and apparently that wasn’t that bad. People have told me their updates took over 4 hours when performed closer to Christmas. Do you know what that 7-year-old is doing during those 4 hours you’re making him wait? Playing Temple Run or Angry Birds on his iPad mini. Way to go Nintendo.


I’ll go on record and say that I think this is the last video game console Nintendo will make for the home. I just don’t see the future here with hardware. Not by a mile.


Nintendo needs to realize that hardware is hardware and that Nintendo’s hardware isn’t special, it isn’t elegant and it isn’t thoughtful. It’s merely a delivery mechanism in a time where design has never been more important.


Nintendo is a great company, one that has invented so many great products, but sooner or later it will be forced to offer its titles on iOS devices and Android devices. It’s going to get to that point. There’s way too much revenue to be made — Nintendo isn’t Sega, and Sega is crushing it as a software-only company.


I just hope Nintendo follows suit sooner or later, because I have $ 9.99 ready to go for the Super Mario app on iOS.


This article was originally published by BGR


Gaming News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: The Boy Genius Report: The Wii U is the Nintendo’s last console
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Shark Tank Bursts in Mall in China, Caught on Video















12/28/2012 at 01:55 PM EST



A 33-ton tank housing sharks, turtles and fish shattered in a Shanghai shopping mall, sending a torrent of water that injured more than a dozen shoppers and employees in a dramatic moment caught on video.

The tank burst Dec. 19 at the Orient Shopping Center, hurtling huge shards of glass through the gushing water that wiped out a cosmetics counter. Those injured suffered cuts and bruises and several people had to be rescued, according to Chinese news reports.

Three lemon sharks, several turtles and numerous small fish also were killed.

Installed just two years ago, the tank may have broken due to a combination of low temperatures and weak materials, according to the BBC.

Read More..

Kenya hospital imprisons new mothers with no money


NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — The director of the Pumwani Maternity Hospital, located in a hardscrabble neighborhood of downtown Nairobi, freely acknowledges what he's accused of: detaining mothers who can't pay their bills. Lazarus Omondi says it's the only way he can keep his medical center running.


Two mothers who live in a mud-wall and tin-roof slum a short walk from the maternity hospital, which is affiliated with the Nairobi City Council, told The Associated Press that Pumwani wouldn't let them leave after delivering their babies. The bills the mothers couldn't afford were $60 and $160. Guards would beat mothers with sticks who tried to leave without paying, one of the women said.


Now, a New York-based group has filed a lawsuit on the women's behalf in hopes of forcing Pumwani to stop the practice, a practice Omondi is candid about.


"We hold you and squeeze you until we get what we can get. We must be self-sufficient," Omondi said in an interview in his hospital office. "The hospital must get money to pay electricity, to pay water. We must pay our doctors and our workers."


"They stay there until they pay. They must pay," he said of the 350 mothers who give birth each week on average. "If you don't pay the hospital will collapse."


The Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the suit this month in the High Court of Kenya, says detaining women for not paying is illegal. Pumwani is associated with the Nairobi City Council, one reason it might be able to get away with such practices, and the patients are among Nairobi's poorest with hardly anyone to stand up for them.


Maimouna Awuor was an impoverished mother of four when she was to give birth to her fifth in October 2010. Like many who live in Nairobi's slums, Awuor performs odd jobs in the hopes of earning enough money to feed her kids that day. Awuor, who is named in the lawsuit, says she had saved $12 and hoped to go to a lower-cost clinic but was turned away and sent to Pumwani. After giving birth, she couldn't pay the $60 bill, and was held with what she believes was about 60 other women and their infants.


"We were sleeping three to a bed, sometimes four," she said. "They abuse you, they call you names," she said of the hospital staff.


She said saw some women tried to flee but they were beaten by the guards and turned back. While her husband worked at a faraway refugee camp, Awuor's 9-year-old daughter took care of her siblings. A friend helped feed them, she said, while the children stayed in the family's 50-square-foot shack, where rent is $18 a month. She says she was released after 20 days after Nairobi's mayor paid her bill. Politicians in Kenya in general are expected to give out money and get a budget to do so.


A second mother named in the lawsuit, Margaret Anyoso, says she was locked up in Pumwani for six days in 2010 because she could not pay her $160 bill. Her pregnancy was complicated by a punctured bladder and heavy bleeding.


"I did not see my child until the sixth day after the surgery. The hospital staff were keeping her away from me and it was only when I caused a scene that they brought her to me," said Anyoso, a vegetable seller and a single mother with five children who makes $5 on a good day.


Anyoso said she didn't have clothes for her child so she wrapped her in a blood-stained blouse. She was released after relatives paid the bill.


One woman says she was detained for nine months and was released only after going on a hunger strike. The Center for Reproductive Rights says other hospitals also detain non-paying patients.


Judy Okal, the acting Africa director for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said her group filed the lawsuit so all Kenyan women, regardless of socio-economic status, are able to receive health care without fear of imprisonment. The hospital, the attorney general, the City Council of Nairobi and two government ministries are named in the suit.


___


Associated Press reporter Tom Odula contributed to this report.


Read More..

Putin to Sign Ban on U.S. Adoptions of Russian Children





MOSCOW President Vladimir V. Putin said on Thursday that he would sign into law a bill banning the adoption of Russian children by American citizens, retaliating against an American law that punishes Russians accused of violating human rights and dealing a potentially grave setback to bilateral relations.




Mr. Putin announced his decision at a meeting with senior government officials, including cabinet members and legislative leaders. The adoption ban, included in a broader law aimed at retaliating against the United States, was approved unanimously by the Federation Council, the upper chamber of Parliament, on Wednesday.


Mr. Putin also said he would sign a decree calling for improvements in Russia’s deeply troubled child welfare system that the Federation Council also adopted Wednesday. “I intend to sign the law,” Mr. Putin said, “as well as a presidential decree changing the procedure of helping orphaned children, children left without parental care, and especially children who are in a disadvantageous situation due to their health problems.”


United States officials have strongly criticized the measure and have urged the Russian government not to enmesh orphaned children in politics.


“It is misguided to link the fate of children to unrelated political considerations,” a State Department spokesman, Patrick Ventrell, said on Wednesday before Mr. Putin announced his decision.


Internally, however, Obama administration officials have been debating how strongly to respond to the adoption ban, and are trying to assess the potential implications for other aspects of the relationship with Russia. The United States, for example, now relies heavily on overland routes through Russia to ship supplies to military units in Afghanistan, and has enlisted Russia’s help in containing Iran’s nuclear program. The former cold war rivals also have sharp disagreements, notably over the civil war in Syria.


Until Thursday, these larger considerations, along with the possibility that Mr. Putin might veto the adoption bill, seemed to forestall a more forceful response from Washington.


The ban is set to take effect on Tuesday, and some senior officials in Moscow said they expected it to have the immediate effect of blocking the departure of 46 children whose adoptions by American parents were nearly completed. Adoption agency officials in the United States who work regularly with Russian orphanages said they expected the number of families immediately affected by the ban to be far larger, about 200 to 250 who have already identified a child that they planned to adopt.


Since Mr. Putin returned to the presidency in May, Russian officials have used a juggernaut of legislation and executive decisions to curtail the United States’ influence and involvement in Russia, undoing major partnerships that began after the fall of the Soviet Union.


The adoption ban, however, is the first step to take direct aim at the American public and would effectively undo a bilateral agreement on international adoptions that was ratified this year and took effect Nov. 1. That agreement called for heightened oversight in response to several high-profile cases of abuse and deaths of adopted Russian children in the United States.


About 1,000 Russian children were adopted in 2011 by parents from the United States, which leads in adoptions here, and more than 45,000 such children have been adopted by American parents since 1999.


Pavel A. Astakhov, Russia’s child rights commissioner and a major proponent of the ban, said the 46 pending adoptions would be blocked regardless of previous agreements, and he expressed no regrets over the likely emotional turmoil for the families involved.


“The children who have been chosen by foreign American parents — we know of 46 children who were seen, whose paperwork was processed, who came in the sights of American agencies,” Mr. Astakhov said in his statement. “They will not be able to go to America, to those who wanted to see them as their adopted children. There is no need to go out and make a tragedy out of it.”


Read More..

What Did Neve Campbell Name Her Son?




Celebrity Baby Blog





12/27/2012 at 02:00 PM ET



How Neve Campbell Chose Son Caspian's Name
Jon Kopaloff/FilmMagic


Neve Campbell is no stranger in the sea of unusual names.


So when it came to her now 5-month-old son, the actress, wanting him to follow in her footsteps, skipped the mundane monikers.


“We looked through a lot of books and I liked the idea of a unique name,” Campbell, 39, shared during a Monday appearance on The Talk.


“I like having a unique name — it’s [my mom's] maiden name, Neve — and not a lot of people have it. It’s nice having something special and different and so I wanted something like that for our son.”


Before baby boy’s birth, Campbell and JJ Feild had narrowed down their picks to five favorites, but after their first child was born, the winning name was an obvious choice.



“We decided that we’d wait and see and meet him and then decide,” she explains. “And … when  he was born we realized we could only remember one and that was Caspian, so it seemed like it was right.”


');var brightcovevideoid = 2059198034001
');var targetVideoWidth = 300;brightcove.createExperiences();/* iPhone, iPad, iPod */if ((navigator.userAgent.match('iPhone')) || (navigator.userAgent.match('iPad')) || (navigator.userAgent.match('iPod')) || (location.search.indexOf('ipad=true') > -1)) { document.write('
Read More..

Kenya hospital imprisons new mothers with no money


NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — The director of the Pumwani Maternity Hospital, located in a hardscrabble neighborhood of downtown Nairobi, freely acknowledges what he's accused of: detaining mothers who can't pay their bills. Lazarus Omondi says it's the only way he can keep his medical center running.


Two mothers who live in a mud-wall and tin-roof slum a short walk from the maternity hospital, which is affiliated with the Nairobi City Council, told The Associated Press that Pumwani wouldn't let them leave after delivering their babies. The bills the mothers couldn't afford were $60 and $160. Guards would beat mothers with sticks who tried to leave without paying, one of the women said.


Now, a New York-based group has filed a lawsuit on the women's behalf in hopes of forcing Pumwani to stop the practice, a practice Omondi is candid about.


"We hold you and squeeze you until we get what we can get. We must be self-sufficient," Omondi said in an interview in his hospital office. "The hospital must get money to pay electricity, to pay water. We must pay our doctors and our workers."


"They stay there until they pay. They must pay," he said of the 350 mothers who give birth each week on average. "If you don't pay the hospital will collapse."


The Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the suit this month in the High Court of Kenya, says detaining women for not paying is illegal. Pumwani is associated with the Nairobi City Council, one reason it might be able to get away with such practices, and the patients are among Nairobi's poorest with hardly anyone to stand up for them.


Maimouna Awuor was an impoverished mother of four when she was to give birth to her fifth in October 2010. Like many who live in Nairobi's slums, Awuor performs odd jobs in the hopes of earning enough money to feed her kids that day. Awuor, who is named in the lawsuit, says she had saved $12 and hoped to go to a lower-cost clinic but was turned away and sent to Pumwani. After giving birth, she couldn't pay the $60 bill, and was held with what she believes was about 60 other women and their infants.


"We were sleeping three to a bed, sometimes four," she said. "They abuse you, they call you names," she said of the hospital staff.


She said saw some women tried to flee but they were beaten by the guards and turned back. While her husband worked at a faraway refugee camp, Awuor's 9-year-old daughter took care of her siblings. A friend helped feed them, she said, while the children stayed in the family's 50-square-foot shack, where rent is $18 a month. She says she was released after 20 days after Nairobi's mayor paid her bill. Politicians in Kenya in general are expected to give out money and get a budget to do so.


A second mother named in the lawsuit, Margaret Anyoso, says she was locked up in Pumwani for six days in 2010 because she could not pay her $160 bill. Her pregnancy was complicated by a punctured bladder and heavy bleeding.


"I did not see my child until the sixth day after the surgery. The hospital staff were keeping her away from me and it was only when I caused a scene that they brought her to me," said Anyoso, a vegetable seller and a single mother with five children who makes $5 on a good day.


Anyoso said she didn't have clothes for her child so she wrapped her in a blood-stained blouse. She was released after relatives paid the bill.


One woman says she was detained for nine months and was released only after going on a hunger strike. The Center for Reproductive Rights says other hospitals also detain non-paying patients.


Judy Okal, the acting Africa director for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said her group filed the lawsuit so all Kenyan women, regardless of socio-economic status, are able to receive health care without fear of imprisonment. The hospital, the attorney general, the City Council of Nairobi and two government ministries are named in the suit.


___


Associated Press reporter Tom Odula contributed to this report.


Read More..

Wall Street falls for fourth day over "fiscal" fears

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Stocks fell for a fourth day in a row on Thursday and a measure of investor anxiety hit its highest in five months after the top Senate Democrat warned a deal to avoid fiscal austerity measures may not be reached by the December 31 deadline.


The comments by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid just days before the hefty tax hikes and spending cuts go into effect pushed stocks down. The S&P 500 has lost 2.7 percent over the past four days, its worst such run in over a month.


A four-day drop would also mark the S&P 500's longest losing streak in three months as Wall Street wakes up to the possibility that a deal may not be reached until next year.


The CBOE VIX volatility index <.vix>, a measure of investor fear, jumped above 20 for the first time since July, climbing around 4 percent in another sign of growing concern. Investors fear the so-called fiscal cliff could push the economy into recession next year.


The VIX's "recent spike seems to suggest that market participants are bracing for a rather significant uptick in market volatility in early 2013," said Frederic Ruffy, options strategist at WhatsTrading.com.


Stocks in the materials and the financial sectors, which are more vulnerable to the economy's performance, took the brunt of the selling. Shares in Bank of America fell 2 percent to $11.29, while Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold fell 1.6 percent to $33.38.


Reid criticized Republicans for refusing to go along with any tax increases as part of a compromise solution with Democrats. Referring to the fiscal cliff, he said: "It looks like where we're headed."


The Dow Jones industrial average <.dji> was down 106.63 points, or 0.81 percent, at 13,007.96. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index <.spx> was down 12.33 points, or 0.87 percent, at 1,407.50. The Nasdaq Composite Index <.ixic> was down 27.48 points, or 0.92 percent, at 2,962.68.


Frank Lesh, a futures analyst and broker at FuturePath Trading in Chicago, said his clients have been delaying trading due to uncertainty about the fiscal cliff, making the year-end period quieter than usual.


"With the added drama in Washington, we have got even more people sidelined," he said. "No one knows how this turns out or how the markets are going to react to it."


President Barack Obama arrived back in Washington from Hawaii to restart stalled negotiations with Congress. House Speaker John Boehner and other Republican leaders were to hold a conference call with Republican lawmakers. The expectation was that lawmakers would be told to get back to Washington quickly if the Senate passed a bill.


Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner announced the first of a series of measures that should push back the date when the U.S. government will hit its legal borrowing authority - a limit known as the debt ceiling - by about two months.


Economic data seemed to confirm worries about the impact of the fiscal cliff on the economy.


The Conference Board, an industry group, said its index of consumer attitudes in December fell to 65.1 as the budget crisis dented growing optimism about the economy. The gauge fell more than expected from 71.5 in November.


However, the job market continues to mend. Initial claims for unemployment benefits dropped 12,000 to a seasonally adjusted 350,000 last week and the four-week moving average fell to the lowest since March 2008.


But recent signs that the economy is improving have taken a back seat to the political uncertainty.


"The U.S. equity market has not yet adequately responded to a genuinely improving macro backdrop, and is probably held back by uncertainties surrounding the resolution of the 'fiscal cliff'," said Goldman Sachs in a research note.


Marvell Technology Group fell 4.2 percent to $7.09 after it said it would seek to overturn a jury's finding of patent infringement. The stock had fallen more than 10 percent in the previous session after a jury found the company infringed patents held by Carnegie Mellon University and ordered the chipmaker to pay $1.17 billion in damages.


(Reporting by Edward Krudy; Additional reporting by Doris Frankel; Editing by Jan Paschal and Kenneth Barry)



Read More..