Title X Pros And Cons

Public health researchers with the UC San Francisco group, Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, conducted a longitudinal study of 956 women who sought an abortion and were turned away. Diana Foster’s study reveals what happened to the women’s economic standing, health and relationship status after being denied their right. She claims that, “When a woman is denied the abortion she wants, she is statistically more likely to wind up unemployed, on public assistance, and below the poverty line” (Newitz). This is clear because one of the major factors in a woman’s decision to abort, is because of her awareness that she will not be able to financially support her child. One of a woman’s most formidable fears is to fail to adequately raise her child and provide him with his greatest odds to succeed. Naturally, a mother’s ultimate goal is for her children to have a better life than she did. This fuels the majority of people’s ambition and determination to obtain a comfortable and promising life style, to then pass on to their offspring. Women living in poverty seek abortions because they do not want to bring a child in a life of misery and suffering. The decision to terminate a pregnancy is not just blindly decided, all aspects of the mother’s and child’s life are considered. In fact, after initially being denied the right to abort, the survey demonstrates that 45% of the women were on public assistance (Newitz). However, Foster concludes, “a year later, they were far more likely to be on public assistance — 76% of the turnaways were on the dole…67% percent of the turnaways were below the poverty line” (Newitz). Therefore, it is evident that not allowing women to legally have abortions creates more strain on the state because of these mothers' increased dependence on social assistance programs.

This puts women at a disadvantage, because it takes away their access to reproductive services, meaning that they are less likely to exercise reproductive freedom. Taking away access to these services and resources means that women would not be able to control their bodies. The members of our government are currently using their power and privilege to further oppress first, women, second, women with low incomes, and third, women of color.

The United States Government should fund women's health care programs which supports reproductive health, safety against unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections, and if needed, abortions. More and more facilities such as Planned Parenthood, those who help women looking for abortions, are being shut down because of lack of funds. Melissa Reed, president & CEO of Planned Parenthood Keystone, said March 13 that the life terminating business “has made the difficult strategic decision to consolidate health services by closing two centers located in Easton and Bristol to reduce the costs of duplication associated with running two sites in close proximity to others.”(life site) The government should fund abortions because if a woman wants to do it then she should have the right. They can't control other people's bodies.

First I will like to discuss the effect this decision made on an organization. It is important, because this organization is a large vehicle to the effort of birth control. Planned Parenthood, is an organization which offer its services to help family control pregnancies, counsels young woman on abortion, and it 's a lead voice in protection of the body of the female over the offspring. I will continue with Planned Parenthood expansion, while I explained the consequences of the precedent established by Griswold v. Connecticut in subsequent landmark cases.

In today’s society, the separation of church and state is a fundamentally important aspect of our government. Most any citizen would agree that the government should operate based on the law and the constitution, not on the individual 's religious beliefs, yet when the issue is Abortion, that stance is flipped. The debate over abortion rages on despite the supreme court giving women the right to abortion in 1973 with the ruling of Roe v Wade. Looking at both sides objectively, the pro-choice arguments lineup with facts, while the pro-life arguments are either supported by facts yet purposefully misinterpreted, or simply not factual at all. State governments pass laws that regulate abortions and abortion centers all in the attempt to close these centers down and stop women from getting abortions at all, including situations of rape or incest. Just as the government in Brave New World controls the bodies of women by keeping them on contraceptives and controlling their bodily functions through medication, the American government seeks the same control over what women do and don’t do with their body by denying them abortions and birth control.

Planned Parenthood is an organization that provides healthcare and education to both men and women, having over 650 health centers that provide healthcare to countless communities around the world. Shockingly, 78% of those who use Planned Parenthoods services live at or below 150% of the federal poverty line, showing how important this organization is to low-income families (Topulos, Greene, Drazen). Their mission statement is “A Reason for Being”, which is shown through their efforts to provide health care, advocate public policies, create educational programs, and endorse research. There are those who do not believe Planned Parenthood should be funded by the government, though, due to the fact that they provide abortions to women in need. Studies show that the effects of not having Planned Parenthood available are disastrous, causing low-income families to lack a healthcare provider and the number of those who are infected with STD’s and STI’s to rise. The biggest concern communities have about the government defunding Planned Parenthood is the effects that it would have on low-income families who would no longer have access to something that many people take for granted: health care. Although many believe that Planned Parenthood mostly provides abortions, in reality, only 3% of the people that seek help from them receive an abortion, while 97% receive affordable and, in many cases,

Planned parenthood has been a topic of controversy the last couple of years, as people throughout the nation ask whether or not the healthcare organization should be defunded. When video footage was released in 2015 of “Planned Parenthood medical officials discussing the sale of fetal tissue to researchers,” it seemed likely that federal funds would be revoked as backlash from the public was noted (Welch). Although the nonprofit organization does offer the termination of unplanned pregnancies, the organization offers many more services to women and men, such as free birth control and yearly health checkups “backed by medical experts and more than 100 years of research in reproductive health” (Planned Parenthood). As many people struggle financially to provide for their families, Planned Parenthood’s services are a relief to those who otherwise would not be able to afford healthcare, which is why the organization should not be defunded.

Planned Parenthood also receives funding from Title X (Title X: America’s Family Planning Program, n.d.). Title X, is the only federal program grant that is dedicated to providing individuals with

Millions of women across America will struggle to receive the medical attention they need if the federal government stops funding to Planned Parenthood. Every year 363 million dollars goes into the funding “pot” collectively at Planned Parenthood’s nationwide (Clark 5). This money is used predominantly by women; for six in ten women, Planned Parenthood acts as their main source of health care (Clark 4). Many individuals with low incomes depend on these clinics to maintain or help better their health. Recently, the federal government is trying to pass the Pence Amendment, which would eliminate funding to these institutions. The federal government needs to realize how important Planned Parenthood

In a recent article, “Nailed it: Paul Ryan’s perfect answer to why Planned Parenthood should be defunded”, Claire Chretien explains House Speaker Representative Paul Ryan’s view on the defunding of Planned Parenthood. He starts off by stating that he wants to ensure women get the care they need. He says, “we believe that this can better be done by putting that money in federal community health centers” (Chretien). Putting the money into local community centers, congress can ensure that women get all of the health services they need. “Planned Parenthood receives approximately $500 million in public funding, with federal funding consisting of Medicaid reimbursements and grants from the Title X Family Planning Program” (“Planned Parenthood Controversy”). By redirecting the funds into local health centers, people are supporting their community, the cost of care becomes more affordable with the extra funds, and women have access to more than just abortion health

Over a hundred years later, Planned Parenthood still operates under the goal of providing comprehensive reproductive health care services to women. This provision of a full range of reproductive services has been deemed in a study by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and National Partnership for Women and Families to be “essential not only to their health and well-being but also to their ability to pursue an education, hold jobs, support their families, achieve economic security, and function as a free and equal member of society” (Lawrence). The study goes on to say that “without access to the full range of reproductive health services, all that is in jeopardy.” (Lawrence). Planned Parenthood will no longer be able to fulfill its mission of providing a full range of reproductive services if the current federal government achieves their goal of overturning Roe v. Wade. Lawrence, the author of the study, also describes a need for “health care decisions based on patient’s health and needs rather than insurance coverage or payment capabilities.” An interesting point is presented here in that if Planned Parenthood concedes its abortion services, there is no guarantee that whatever organization fills in that gap will do so honestly. There is no other organization so committed to the concept of family planning and reproductive services that they do not run the risk of providing inadequate

The Title X Family Planning program was enacted in 1970 as Title X of the Public Health Service Act (Public Law 91-572 Population Research and Voluntary Family Planning Programs). Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related preventive health services. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Population Affairs (OPA) oversees the Title X program (U.S. Department of Human Services, 2014).

In an effort to combat the epidemic, State Representative Mary González (D) recently introduced to the Texas State Legislature during its 84th session House Bill 90. This bill aims to expand eligibility for assistance under the Texas Women 's Health Program, including access to reproductive services and protective health services, to females ages 15 years and older. Public programs—particularly Medicaid and the Title X federally funded family planning program both of which are used to fund Texas Women’s Health Program system—are essential to women 's access to inexpensive contraceptive services and supplies and their capability to use contraceptives successfully.

The issue of abortion is notoriously controversial. Since the Supreme Court’s 1992 ruling in Casey v. Planned Parenthood, states have enacted different restrictions on the procedure. These restrictions vary from state to state. Nineteen states currently have laws prohibiting partial-birth abortion, and forty-one states strictly prohibit abortions except in cases of life-endangerment. One particularly incendiary area of abortion law is that of public funding. However, as of this year there are only seventeen states that cover abortion procedures through public funding. In this paper we will discuss federal abortion legislation, while describing the laws and political ideologies of the following states: Texas, California, New

Health care and what people are legally allowed to do with their bodies have created controversy galore throughout history. A particular point of debate is the topic of birth control and the government. A dangerous couple, it raises the question of who should have control over contraceptive laws and what controls involving them should be put in place? Currently, under the Obama Administration, the Affordable Care Act and “Obamacare” have been created. One of the sections of this new plan creates a mandate which requires private businesses to provide insurance that covers birth control costs. The government should not be able to force businesses, and therefore the American people, to pay for birth control via health insurance because it