Pulled from Planned Parenthood

  • Thread starter Thread starter grotto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheLittleLady said:
I’m waiting to read the full text of the document. It has not yet been published on line
Click to expand...
Not the final version, from the Federal Register, but the HHS-approved version:

rule

And, as you’d expect, the people on the other side are up in arms already, for example, one group is already planning to fight it in court:

article
 
My state of Indiana and several others tried this years ago, but federal courts ruled that it contradicted Obama era HHS regulations. Planned Parenthood argued two contradictory positions at the same time. PP told the court that they could not remain viable if their abortion business had to be separated from other operations, while simultaneously telling the public that abortions constituted only a tiny portion of their operations.

If the HHS regulations are changed, PP will have to find a different way to convince a judge that they are entitled to taxpayer money.
 
Last edited:
Planned Parenthood and the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association have already filed lawsuits (article). I shouldn’t be surprised but the level of willful ignorance regarding natural family planning always astounds me. It isn’t anything like the rhythm method I learned about in middle school yet people continue to insist that is exactly what it is.
The HHS funding document made repeated favorable mention of "natural family planning" — which encompasses the rhythm method and other strategies for avoiding pregnancy without using contraceptives like the birth-control pill.
Click to expand...
 
signit said:
Not the final version, from the Federal Register, but the HHS-approved version:

rule

And, as you’d expect, the people on the other side are up in arms already, for example, one group is already planning to fight it in court:

article
Click to expand...
Really, this was on the hourly news yesterday, I would have thought most people here would have just been happy to hear about this.
 
And there is the loophole, on pg 192, all they have to do is deem the abortion “medically necessary”:

The Department disagrees with commenters contending that restrictions in the
rule on referral and directive counseling affect situations concerning emergency or
medically necessary care. Section 1008 prohibits funding for Title X projects where
abortion is a method of family planning, and the final rule’s restrictions on referral,
promotion, or encouragement of abortion are similarly limited to abortion as a method of
family planning. Referral for abortion because of an emergency medical situation does
not fall into restrictions concerning abortion as a method of family planning. Paragraphs
(b)(1) of § 59.5 of the final rule makes clear that Title X grantees and subrecipients not
only may, but must, provide for “referral to other medical facilities when medically
necessary.” See also § 59.5(b)(8).102
 
Trader said:
My state of Indiana and several others tried this years ago, but federal courts ruled that it contradicted Obama era HHS regulations. Planned Parenthood argued two contradictory positions at the same time. PP told the court that they could not remain viable if their abortion business had to be separated from other operations, while simultaneously telling the public that abortions constituted only a tiny portion of their operations.
Click to expand...
I worked for a health care company for a few years working on a solution for tracking services and what not. Based on the understanding that I got from working there Planned Parenthood’s statements were not self contradicting. But they don’t align with how most of us regular people speak in conversation.

Let’s say someone goes to a Dr. because they broke their toe. From their perspective they went there for one thing. But there’s a way that everything done for that visit is decomposed to a number of “services.” The diagnosis and the services provided all have ID numbers that mean the same thing across different medical organizations. If one medical organization need to communicate to another about what was done transferring that series of numbers will express the core of the information. For the broken toe visit the person might have gotten a pain killer, an x-ray done, and a splint put on the toe (I don’t know if that’s the proper set of things to do, I’m a Software Engineer, not a Doctor). Those three things would be encoded and could be described as three different services. For the purpose of communication among medical organizations this makes sense. But for regular people just one thing was done.

Planned Parenthood says that abortion makes up a very small percentage of the services that they provide. This is both objectively true while at the same time being probably misleading since people are not going to decompose a medical visit to a list of services. The metric that I believe would be widely understood is what percentage of their revenue comes from abortion. I don’t know what those numbers look like.
 
The article is a little misleading because the actual amount is $60 million that goes to Planned Parenthood according to news articles which is still not bad.
 
Last edited:
But wait! I thought voting for trump was all bad!? So confused. I hope the media unconfuses me.
 
This is great, I see Pro-Life leaders are praising this action. Planned Parenthood has too big of a lobby, is funded by the government. If I"m not repeating myself, on the radio a spokes person said yes, they do conmingle government funds with abortion though, the claim is that they do not do that. That’s an important point and I’m sure debatable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top