Filmmaker Joanna Rudnick on Life with the 鈥淏reast Cancer Gene鈥� and Human Gene Patenting
tells the first-person story of director Joanna Rudnick as she tries to decide on a course of action after testing positive for the BRCA1 mutation, the "breast cancer gene." To raise public awareness of the issues being presented in the April 15th Supreme Court hearing in our case challenging gene patents, Rudnick, POV, and Kartemquin Films will re-release the film online for free streaming. The film features Rudnick's probing interview with Myriad Genetics' founder about its patents on the genes. Today, Rudnick gives POV an update on her health and personal life, and addresses the upcoming Supreme Court case regarding human gene patenting. An excerpt of the update appears below 鈥� to read Rudnick's thoughts in full, and to watch In the Family, go to:
The worst part about being diagnosed with breast cancer is knowing that I had the knowledge to prevent it.
I spent much of my late 20s and early 30s defined by BRCA1, the genetic mutation that gave me an up to 87 percent lifetime risk of developing breast cancer and an up to 60 percent lifetime chance of developing ovarian cancer, which I feared even more since my mother was diagnosed with the disease in her early 40s when I was pre-teen.
As a storyteller, the only way I knew how to cope with the enormity of the identity shift out of the carefree world of the healthy into the purgatory of the potentially unwell, was to make the documentary In the Family.
By playing the YouTube video above, YouTube will place a permanent cookie onto your computer.
Nearly five years after the release of the film on POV in October 2008, I have just finished up my last chemo, enduring 11 infusions, two blood transfusions and too many days laid up in bed listening to the sounds of my little girls giggling, at times too weak to jump up and see their little faces and squeeze them once more before bed.
Why did this happen to me when I knew how high the stakes were? I was waiting. Waiting to find the right person to launch a life with who would get what was in store for him by linking up with me. I found him and he's amazing (he has slept less than is humanly possible these last few months). We got hitched, had 2 beautiful girls as fast as we possibly could. There were no pauses. I remember calling Luis Pedraza from In the Family on my 38th birthday, proudly announcing that I was about to give birth to my second girl and get my ovaries out, just as I'd promised him in the last scene in the film.
As part of our recent move to the Bay Area, I started scheduling appointments to meet doctors who could perform my prophylactic mastectomy and hysterectomy. I had the first of these set a few weeks after we arrived. But just three days after opening the door on our new home, I felt a lump while I was breastfeeding my nearly 3-month-old. I was subsequently diagnosed with an early-stage breast cancer.
One day after my last chemo and exactly one month before a bilateral mastectomy that's been 12 years in the making, why I am writing about this rather than sleeping off the drugs as they work their way through my system? I don't want my daughters to have to go through what I'm going through. (Heck, I'm taking some of the same drugs my mom took!) I don't want them to have to rush their dreams. And I certainly don't want their only solution to be removing body parts.
I strongly believe, as I did over a decade ago when I first conceived this film, that one of the barriers to finding better answers are the patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes held by Myriad Genetics.
Learn more about gene patenting and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Free Speech
National Security
老澳门开奖结果 and Partners Urge Supreme Court to Block TikTok Ban老澳门开奖结果 and Partners Urge Supreme Court to Block TikTok Ban
WASHINGTON 鈥� Today, the 老澳门开奖结果, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to block the enforcement of a law that would effectively ban people in America from using TikTok as soon as January 19, 2025. Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected TikTok鈥檚 challenge to the law. TikTok has asked the Supreme Court for a temporary injunction to prevent the app from being banned while the court considers whether to take the case, saying that unless the justices intervene, the law will 鈥渟hutter one of America鈥檚 most popular speech platforms the day before a presidential inauguration.鈥� 鈥淭he Constitution imposes an extraordinarily high bar on this kind of mass censorship,鈥漵aid Patrick Toomey, deputy director of 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淭he Supreme Court should take up this important case and protect the rights of millions of Americans to freely express themselves and engage with others around the world.鈥� The brief argues that the D.C. Circuit failed to fully address the law鈥檚 profound implications for the First Amendment rights of the 170 million Americans who use TikTok. While the lower court鈥檚 decision correctly recognized that the statute triggers First Amendment scrutiny, it barely addressed users鈥� First Amendment interests in speaking, sharing, and receiving information on the platform. The court also perplexingly attempted to cast the government鈥檚 ban on TikTok as a vindication of users鈥� First Amendment rights, which it is not. The rights groups also explain that the law was intended to suppress certain content and viewpoints that many legislators believe could be amplified on TikTok, including the risk of foreign 鈥減ropaganda.鈥� But under the First Amendment, the government must meet a very high bar to restrict speech based on concerns about its 鈥渕otivating ideology鈥� or 鈥減erspective,鈥� and the government has not come close to meeting that bar here. 鈥淭he government should not be able to restrict speech, especially to the extent here, based on guessing about the mere possibility of uncertain future harm,鈥� said David Greene, civil liberties director at EFF. 鈥淭he Supreme Court should put the TikTok ban on hold while it considers the DC Circuit鈥檚 erroneous ruling.鈥� Finally, the brief underscores that the government can鈥檛 impose this type of sweeping ban unless it鈥檚 necessary to prevent extremely serious and imminent harm to national security. But the government has not provided evidence of impending harm, or evidence that banning TikTok is the only available way to address its concerns. As the brief explains, the D.C. Circuit improperly treated the government鈥檚 invocation of 鈥渘ational security鈥� as a trump card and failed to hold the government to its burden. 鈥淩estricting citizens鈥� access to foreign media is a practice that has long been associated with repressive regimes, and we should be very wary of letting the practice take root here,鈥� said Jameel Jaffer, executive director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. 鈥淚t would do lasting damage to the First Amendment and our democracy if the Supreme Court let this ban go into effect even temporarily.鈥� You can find the brief online here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24A587/335380/20241217144322392_24A587%20TikTok%20v%20Garland%20Amicus%20Brief%20pdfa.pdf -
MississippiJul 2024
Free Speech
Privacy & Technology
NetChoice v. FitchNetChoice v. Fitch
Whether a law that mandates age verification for all users of social media services violates the First Amendment. -
News & CommentaryDec 2024
Free Speech
Can you define pornography? Neither can the government.Can you define pornography? Neither can the government.
We break down the absurd-but-true history of trying to censor sexual speech under the guise of "keeping kids safe." -
Minnesota Supreme CourtNov 2024
Free Speech
Energy Transfer LP v. Greenpeace International, Unicorn RiotEnergy Transfer LP v. Greenpeace International, Unicorn Riot
This case in the Minnesota Supreme Court asks whether the MFFIA's protections apply to newsgatherers even if they are alleged to have engaged in trespassing while newsgathering. The 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the 老澳门开奖结果 of Minnesota and law firm Biersdorf & Associations, filed a brief representing Unicorn Riot, a media organization that covered protests of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The brief argues that MFFIA and constitutional reporter鈥檚 privileges, under both the U.S. and Minnesota constitutions, protect Unicorn Riot from having to comply with Energy Transfer鈥檚 subpoenas.