It was hardly a surprise to anyone paying attention; the outcomes of slashing funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood were bound to be detrimental. It’s basic logic: when you strip away programs that educate, protect, and provide crucial healthcare to millions of Americans—especially those who might otherwise lack access—the fallout is never positive.
Yet, under the banner of “protecting values,” “Christianity,” and the often vague notion of “saving lives,” the relentless efforts to defund Planned Parenthood persist, leading to the closure of numerous essential health centers across the country. These clinics, which staunch anti-abortion advocates seek to dismantle, provide vital services each year, including:
- Birth control for nearly two million individuals
- Over 4.2 million STD tests and treatments
- More than 320,000 breast exams
- Close to 295,000 Pap tests
Isn’t it ironic? These services are designed to prevent unwanted pregnancies, treat potentially life-threatening diseases, and catch cancers early when they can be treated effectively.
As we navigate through 2020, the debate continues with unwavering anti-abortion proponents clinging to misconceptions about Planned Parenthood. Many of the clinics that have shut their doors didn’t even perform abortions. Instead, they played a critical role in decreasing the number of abortions by offering education, contraceptives, and comprehensive healthcare services.
It’s essential to recognize that abortions have existed throughout history and will continue regardless of funding. Cutting support for Planned Parenthood doesn’t eliminate the occurrence of abortions; it merely makes them less safe. Statistics show that when programs like those offered by Planned Parenthood are cut, rates of teen pregnancy actually rise. In such scenarios, many young women facing unintended pregnancies often feel they have limited options.
Take Texas, for example. Before 2011, the state saw a remarkable 44% drop in its teen birth rate from 1988 to 2011. That changed dramatically when then-Governor Rick Perry slashed the family planning budget by 67%, resulting in the closure of 82 clinics, none of which provided abortions. In the years that followed, the teen birth rate began to climb again.
In a state that already promotes abstinence-only education (or none at all), defunding clinics like Planned Parenthood further isolates young women from necessary resources. It reflects a refusal to acknowledge the reality that young women are sexually active and need comprehensive education, healthcare, and access to contraception.
Moreover, after Texas cut funding for Planned Parenthood, pregnancy-related deaths doubled. How, then, can one call this approach “pro-life”?
In contrast, let’s look at Colorado, where a $23 million investment from the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation over six years provided low-cost contraception to low-income women. The results were striking: from 2009 to 2013, the teen birth rate plummeted by 40%, and the teen abortion rate decreased by 42%. This illustrates how access to contraception allows women to plan their futures and pursue education before starting families.
But the issue extends far beyond just abortion; many women rely on Planned Parenthood as their sole source of healthcare. About 40% of women visiting family planning clinics describe them as their only medical option. With over 20% of the counties lacking any other healthcare providers, the implications of closing these clinics are severe.
Critics often claim that other healthcare facilities can simply absorb the patients lost from Planned Parenthood, which is a dangerously misguided notion. Many ob-gyn providers accepting Medicaid are in short supply, and Planned Parenthood clinics are more likely to offer a comprehensive range of contraceptive methods and rapid HIV testing on-site. The American Public Health Association has called it “absurd” to suggest that other providers can fill the gap left by Planned Parenthood.
For instance, in Indiana, one of the clinics that closed was in Scott County, the epicenter of the state’s most severe HIV outbreak. The absence of testing and care resources in such areas can lead to costly public health crises.
In summary, the ongoing attacks on Planned Parenthood are stripping essential resources from Americans who depend on them, all under the guise of political ideology. The nationwide defunding of these services ultimately harms the very fabric of society, rather than strengthening it. According to the Guttmacher Institute, publicly funded family planning services prevented two million unintended pregnancies and 693,000 abortions in 2013 alone. Without these vital services, we can expect rates of unintended pregnancies and abortions to rise significantly.
What does it truly mean to be “pro-life”?
For further insights, check out this post on how to navigate home insemination, or visit American Pregnancy for excellent resources on pregnancy and home insemination.
Summary: Cutting funding for Planned Parenthood and similar organizations leads to significant health and social repercussions, including rising teen pregnancy rates and increased maternal mortality. While advocates of defunding may claim to support life, the reality is that these actions endanger the very lives they seek to protect.
Keyphrase: consequences of cutting Planned Parenthood funding
Tags: [“home insemination kit”, “home insemination syringe”, “self insemination”]