|
||
Why Contraception Saves Money and Prevents Abortion
A Doctor's Take on the Stimulus Package
One cannot help but wonder whether congressional Republicans actually want to maintain the current rates of abortion, teen pregnancy, unnecessary public spending, or decreased productivity. Their policy on contraception suggests that they do.
House Republicans dogmatically refused to vote for any stimulus program that permitted states to fund contraception for Medicaid eligible citizens and those living off incomes just above the poverty level. This policy will lead to more unplanned pregnancies (with the associated abortions) and will block billions of dollars in savings.
To understand how this works, it is helpful to look at California's experience with a state-funded contraception and family planning initiative for women with incomes between 100% and 200% of the poverty level:
Four years after implementing the program, California saved an estimated $500 million in public health care spending, net of what they spent on the program itself. In fact, for every dollar invested in the program, the state of California saved an estimated $5.33, over a period of five years. These are conservative estimates that do not include money saved through increased productivity and cost savings from reductions in paid medical leave and sick days that result from unplanned pregnancies. Few other public spending plans can boast such a positive return on investment.
While I respect the opinions of those who oppose abortion, I do not understand why those same leaders would oppose policies proven to reduce abortions. Modest estimates put the number of undesired pregnancies averted in California at over 108,000 with over 41,000 abortions prevented within the first 4 years after expanding access to contraceptive options. Over a quarter of those pregnancies would have been in adolescents under the age of 20, accounting for over 11,000 prevented abortions.
A proven path to fewer abortions and marked reductions in federal spending, what is a conservative not to like? Perhaps it is the mistaken belief that the availability of contraceptive access will increase premarital sexual activity. This belief simply fails to stand up to the evidence. In 2002, the Department of Health and Human Services (under Republican Secretary Tommy Thompson), released a report documenting an increase in contraceptive use with a decrease in sexual activity between 1995 and 2002. Supplying contraceptives and educating adolescents about sex during the late 1990s did not increase their likelihood to engage in sexual activities; it did keep them from getting pregnant. Even supplying emergency contraception to adolescents, prior to sexual activity, has been proven not to affect sexual behaviors.
Following conversations with republican leaders, President Obama requested that the contraceptive waiver, which would allow states to fund such programs through Medicaid, be removed from the stimulus package. While I appreciate the President's attempt to find a bipartisan compromise and show goodwill, only evidence-based health policies should be supported. Access to contraception is proven to decrease unintended pregnancies, abortions, and reduce overall health expenditures.
Now that house republicans rejected the stimulus bill, I hope President Obama and congressional leaders will consider writing this provision back into the bill. It makes economic, social and public health sense.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Excellent! article and exactly the reason government has no business being in the medical business or in the medical funding business...........Reps will continue to over-moralize; Dems, over tax and regulate. Both limit access and choice which ought to be personal, not politcial and/or bureaucratic matters.
Make oral contraceptives available over the counter. That way the woman who is lucky enough to still have a job, can still prevent an unwanted and unaffordable pregnancy, and keep off the "dole" for herself and her potential child. There is nothing more important to a woman's ability to earn money, than being in control of her fertility, yet we have to beg a doctor for a safe and effective drug. If it was men who had to have babies, the pill would be available to them on every corner (probably in vending machines). Women on medicaid should get the drug for free too!
This is actually his wife Batrice Adcock. I have reproductive freedom! I practice natural family planning (not the rhythm method), but modern methods of NFP, which range from 97 to more than 99.6 % (http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/nfp/CMR-Winter-Spring07-Addendum.pdf) effective for pregnancy avoidance, when used correctly. I am near completion of a masters degree in nursing and have a full-time job as a natural family planning program director, a job which allows me to do most of my work from home and care for my 5 month old, a pursuit that brings me more joy than my overachieving in many other areas of my life has every brought me.
My husband and male colleagues do not fear me. They respect me and help me to reach my full potential.
Stan Weed writes an excellent article showing that the drops in teen pregnancy we saw in the 90s are convincingly due to abstinence education, rather than increased access to contraceptives.
Take a chance--be open-minded, as I have been in reading your posts, and read his article at:
http://www.usccb.org/prolife/programs/rlp/99rlweed.shtml
I appreciate the assertiveness of your comments. I beg that you provide yourselves with a more well-rounded education and rely less on your emotions.
If this method is so efficient, how come its not being used or scientifically proven to work?
Can religious people have some mercy on the poor , the teens, and the disadvantaged , who really need to avoid getting pregnant and ruining their lives and of their offspring as well.? Its just common sense that its a big long term responsability to bring another life into the world. It shuld be planned and wanted and not happen accidentally when unwanted . there are already enough people on this planet, not to have to put unwanted ones. Family planning is part of using your brain and making responsible decisions about very important matters and contraception should be free and available to all who want and need it w/o prejudices from religious narrow minded zealots!
If the government is serious about contraception, then, allow each person a replacement supported by the government. AFDC to a single parent, for only one child with contraception to prevent a second. Income tax deductions for a maximum of two children. Child care support in the tax law for up to two children and no more. There is the freedom to have more, but the state will not support any more than replacement of our adult population. Those who choose to not have children, could then sell their quota to others. The state could then use the saved monies to fund additional contraception to those who cannot afford it. All health plans should cover contraception, so those with health insurance (hopefully all of us, soon) would have reduced contraception costs.
By insisting on no birth control, they are adhering to religious practice. This is dogma, not logic. However, if you were to attach logic to this, by increasing the population you only increase the possibility of war because the limited resources would have to be shared by more people and human nature does not want to share equally. This was from another religious authority, the curate, Thomas Malthus. Given the bent of the previous administration, they had a plan for using the increased population. Dogma breeds dogmatic solutions.
You made it so clear and simple, Its mind boggling the republicans just dont get it , or is it just they want to be contrary ? please circulate this issue out and around so all can read and be informed. There's definately a misperception going on here, that handing out condoms and birth control will actually increase the number of abortions , which we all know the opposite is true! The lack of BASIC information the GOP base gets, is truly primitive, piolitically motivated, misguided and regrettable.and finally bad for the country and the plalnet as a whole.
The Dems couldn't articulately or effectively convey this message. Please have them try it again! It's very important.
Providing contraceptives will definitely help the economy. They will take the taxpayers off the hook for some of the many charges already being doled out to thousands of non-sufficient females for prenatal care, delivery (natural as well as C-sections), WIC, food stamps, and increased welfare benefits if fathers are not in the pictures.
It is a mans world after all! Why is it when anything that has to do with a
woman 's health ,it is always decided by a man.
If it was a subject of what it is good for men, there is no problem it would always be passed.
Now who was it that ate the apple? Adam was cast out of the Garden of Eden also
If you want to start convincing people you have a logical and reasonable argument, stop using mythological stories from 3000 year old Middle East tribes to back yourself up...
If you want to be included in the discussion then respect all those people who have religious beliefs...
If you can't respect that then you have no starting point!
Right... so 3000 years of documented history should be thrown aside because you feel it's a scam or something... the entire civilized world uses Christ's birth as a calendar, embeds Christ's teachings in their laws, ethics, philosophy, etc. is a fluke??
The fact that the Catholic Church can document every Pope since Christ and their writings/observations about the issues of life on earth...
Wake-up!
Amen! Absolutely. We were made to be a highly adaptable species, so we should be adapting to our ever changing world....and we should, if we want our species to survive. Those who drag their feet in 3000 /5000 yr. mythologies, are hurting our chances of survival by over populating the world. This will cause wars, diseases, lack of resources, climate changes that put a us all at risk.
Also it costs taxpayers a lot of money in food stamps, welfare, and medical and even jails, to care for these unwanted poor children and people, not to mention the dwindling lack of resources in an ever growing population. Religious people insulate themselves by thinking God has a plan for them....they really feel important,,,, but the reality is that most likely there is no after life...and this is all we've got ! There certainly has been no proof of it being otherwise , other than blind faith.
Most of us agree with the fine Dr. ; Yet how can anyone respect the opinions of ignorant religious people. And isn't it true that the majority of teen pregnancies are in overwhelmingly religious parts of the country ? So what if there is more teen promiscuity ? At least the young girls will not be getting pregnant .
Control through fear of religion and of course, money money money.
There is nothing truly human in the Republican way of treating this. It's vicious & selfish.
Not to mention clearly close-minded to those who are not hard core Christians.
Plus, it's very male dominated. Like in Victorian times- where midwives were doing
a job they've done for centuries, then along comes a male doctor and WHAM! control.
Then what happens? Disease, death and the loss of birthing as a natural occurrence rather
than a treatable malady.
Another way to keep the little guys down, I suppose.
Another reason to support Planned Parenthood!! Donate!!
From a trauma and family psychotherapist -- and systems and organizational consultant:
In addition to the facts in this well-written article:
1) Reproductive and free education does have something to do with the economy!
Preventing unwanted pregnancies and possible abortions helps women work and go to school and not rely on the state to help feed their children. It helps income go around for the children she has. It keeps women in the workforce who would otherwise be staying home taking care of children. Teenagers will not be frozen in an undereducated, dependent class.
2) Nobody -- at all -- speaks about the importance of giving away condoms in the prevention of HIV/AIDS. This subject just is not touched on in the 'contraceptives' debate. Witness Rick Warren who went to Uganda to persuade the president to halt the effective 'safe sex/use condoms' campaigns with these slogans on billboards, in favor of changing the same billboards to 'use abstinence' (that means no sex! not likely!) whereafter the rate of HIV/AIDS has gone way up again. His fanatical and twisted campaign to stop people using condoms -- never mind how many die of AIDS -- seems the quintessence of what the Republicans are doing. It's very Taliban-ish, isn't it? Very barefoot-and-pregnant-ish, isn't it?
(Notice it is men politicians who are happy to have single women and married women as pregnant as they can get -- some consciously and unconsciously see pregnancy as a just punishment for women's having sex.)
What is it with Republicans and sex? At the mention of anything related to sex, even contraceptives, it's "OMG, someone, somewhere might be having sex! OMG, we can't have that!" They don't want people to have contraceptions, and they don't want women to have abortions. So, I guess that means they don't want people to have sex. Either that or they don't understand that most families can't afford a dozen children.
I agree. George Bush, a representative oh-so-moral Republican, opposed abortion, contraception, and embryonic stem cell research, yet favored the death penalty, an avoidable war, and was anti-nature. He's certainly not in favor of life. What's the hangup on things pertaining to human reproduction?
"But if reproduction ceased to be the goal, sexuality might become yoked to pleasure.
That is the legacy the religious right has fought against, and it’s that agenda that cut funding for family planning."
Ruth Rosen at
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/29-1
Number 1- Condoms are cheap and prevent STD and HIV, not just pregnancy.
Number 2- California is a bad example to use for saving taxpayer's money.
Dr. Klatsky: You're using logic, rational common sense and enlightened reasoning to try and figure out the insanity and/or astonishing stupidity of GOP-thought. That's a losing cause - and a waste of time - right from the get-go!!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
