Are Government Sponsored Family Planning Programs Effective?

According to a new report issued by the Guttmacher Institute, having and enforcing family planning that is publicly funded is responsible in preventing approximately 800,000 abortions and almost 2 million unplanned pregnancies each year in the United States. This research which demonstrates that billions of dollars each year are saved due to these types of programs could not come at a better time as there have been critics rallying against an expansion of family planning programs. While the Guttmacher Institute is very much a pro-choice corporation, experts respect the research it performs on behalf of reproductive issues.

Co-author of the report Rachel Gold asserts that the family planning program is “smart government at its best.” She emphasizes that research shows that for each dollar the government spends on family planning programs, $4 is put back into taxpayers’ pockets for those expenses of unplanned pregnancies/births for women who may be eligible for Medicaid. At a time when the economy is taking a nosedive, any money saved is reassuring; however, despite this case for saving money, the issue of using government money for these programs still causes rifts between the parties.

Congressional Democrats are still pushing forward to increase funding for the family planning program called Title X with the goal to minimize unwanted pregnancies. Data from the research provides Democrats with much needed statistics to prove that family planning has positively impacted society. According to the date gathered from 2006, the government-sponsored family planning program helped prevent 1.94 million unwanted pregnancies; this number includes approximately 400,000 teenage pregnancies. Projections applied to this data show that of those close to 2 million pregnancies, there would have been 270,000 miscarriages, 860,000 unintended births and around 810,000 abortions. Had the family planning not existed, the abortion rate in the United States could have been almost 66% higher overall and 200% higher amongst women who are considered poorer.

In addition, the research showed that over 9 million women were able to get contraceptive services in 2006. Also, 60% of women feel that local family planning centers are their main health care sources, where they receive breast and pelvic examinations and tests for HIV, blood pressure and diabetes. According to Gold, “States as varied as Texas, New York, South Carolina and Missouri have decided to undergo the cumbersome and time-consuming process to seek federal permission, known as a waiver, to expand family planning services. It’s a popular policy because it helps women while saving public dollars. It more than pays for itself.”

Many critics of the federally funded family planning legislation are against it because one of the main recipients of the Title X funding is Planned Parenthood; they offer both reproductive and family planning services as well as provide abortions. While any funding that comes from the Title X project cannot be used to perform abortions, those who object to it feel that providing any type of funding to Planned Parenthood allows other portions of its budget to be freed up to perform more abortions. President of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins, states, “It’s another Planned Parenthood bailout. It covers their overhead.” In addition he worries about allowing contraceptives to be given to people who are not married. He states, “The issue is whether taxpayers should fund, and thereby encourage, behavior that’s risky and morally questionable.” Democratic Representative, Diana DeGette, responds, “Right-wing Republicans continually use sex as a weapon when they don’t have an effective argument to stand on. They attack commonsense policies that not only save taxpayers money, but also promote public health.”