April 15, 2020

#IStandWithPP
An Issue Brief
Janae Sayler
Because They Care
An Introduction
Emily Ferry was twenty two when she first moved to Alaska. Being a young adult, her
career was just starting to take off. Soon after her arrival, she started to notice her stomach had
begun to swell. She knew she was not pregnant, therefore, she became alarmed at what the
swelling could possibly mean. With her career only beginning, Emily had no way of obtaining
health insurance that would not drain out her entire savings account. She decided her only choice
was to go to Planned Parenthood, where she was allowed to have a medical exam at a discounted
and affordable price. This story rings true for millions of others. Planned Parenthood’s diagnosis
saved Emily’s life. The swelling was due to a large tumor engulfing one of her ovaries, which if
not treated, could have killed her.1 Stories like these are why the Trump Administration’s plans
to nationally defund Planned Parenthood could be detrimental to the communities that benefit the
most from these services. Defunding in this context is defined as, “blocking patients who use
public health programs, such as Medicaid and Title X, from choosing Planned Parenthood health
centers for their preventive care”.2 Planned Parenthood is an essential medical facility whose
elimination would threaten the lives of vulnerable and impoverished communities.

The War on Title X

The Changes We Don’t Need
The purpose of Planned Parenthood is often distorted and their
reputation is wrecked by the media and others that are misled on what the
organization actually does. The organization is infamously known for
providing abortions for women all over the country, therefore, it is
constantly under attack from both conservative and religious groups. For all
of the services Planned Parenthood provides, abortion only accounts for 4%
of their total medical services.3 The most used services are STI testing and
treatments, which accounts for 50% of the total medical services.4

1
 The defunding of the entire organization would take away important medical services that

are also provided at these clinics which include, cancer screenings and prevention, contraception,

routine checkups, and other women’s health services. The availability and affordability of these

services is the main goal of Planned Parenthood. The service prices are determined by a sliding

scale.5 Depending on the location of the clinic, a “financial snapshot” of the patient's last few

weeks of pay determines a fair price that fits their budget.6 This pricing method provides patients

with the ability to seek medical guidance without insurance or large fees.7

Since 40% of the organization’s funding is allocated from the government, a full

defunding of Planned Parenthood would cause a major step back for women’s reproductive

rights and would endanger women by not allowing full counsel on their reproductive health.8

This allocated funding is made possible through Title X, a provision made in 1970, which

explicitly focused on the delivery of family planning services from the government.9 The four

million patients receiving Title X funding benefit from the birth control and reproductive

services it provides. For Fiscal Year 2018, Title X provided $286.5 million in funding for health

centers with family planning provisions. This meant that for these centers, 19% of their overall

funding stemmed from Title X.10 When the notoriously conservative Trump administration

released their Health and Human Services Title X grant recipients in March of 2019, four of the

affiliate clinics of Planned Parenthood were left off this list, leaving them struggling with holes

in their annual budget plans. For many patients nationally, this was a disturbing announcement,

even though Planned Parenthood makes up only 13% of Title X centers, it provides for 41% of

the four million patients using Title X programs.11 This was the first step in the administration's

oppressive move to attack women’s reproductive services.

Additionally, the administration announced that it will no longer support health

organizations that provide abortions if they do not abide by the new provisions they are

2
proposing.12 These new provisions state that Planned Parenthood, and similar Title X clinics, are
not allowed to write referrals for abortions. This allows doctors to speak to their patients about
abortion services, and all other reproductive options, but cannot advise where they can get
abortion services.13 This gag rule would likely push funding into anti-abortion providers, since
women would be left with minimal options for safe abortion.14 These types of restrictive policies
are a major step back in the progress made since the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade that
guaranteed the safety and choice to have abortions.

A World Without
Negative Effects of Defunding
As previously stated, Planned Parenthood offers women referrals and discounted services

for reproductive health. The reproductive health care and educational services Planned

Parenthood provides, reaches over 4.6 million people annually, who are majority, “low-income,

uninsured, and underserved clients”.15

The four distinct groups that defunding would affect the most are people of color, people

in rural areas, the LBGTQ+ community and people with lower incomes.16 By removing the

services that were once affordable and convenient, this leaves a gap for those in these groups

who inevitably would have to travel far distances to receive Title X services.

Rural places contain half of the Planned Parenthood facilities nationwide, therefore, their

closing would leave 21% of the counties in America without a family planning facility within

reasonable distance of where they live.17 In the state of Utah, Planned Parenthood is the only

Title X provider, and by contrast, in the state of Minnesota, Planned Parenthood provides

services to 90% of Title X patients. In this reality without Planned Parenthood, hundreds of Title

X patients would have to seek clinics in other states. These examples provide evidence that

without these services thousands of people would be hurting.18

3
 People of color would be the biggest group, of the four, disproportionately hurt by these

aggressive policies.19 This group is already at a disadvantage, since historical prefaces have made

it harder for them to have health coverage in general. More reliance on federal aid programs

from this group is another part of these historical repercussions, therefore, less access would

leave them extremely exposed and in danger of poor health. Of the 2.4 million Planned

Parenthood patients, 35% of them identify as a person of color.20 Black communities constitute

15% of the entire population, and Latino communities make up 21% of the population.21

A majority of the clients using Planned Parenthood services also use Medicaid and Title

X.22 Medicaid helps those with low-income to have health services provided by the government.

These populations would be left with few options for reproductive health services and birth

control methods, since the federal aid programs are limited to where patients can be treated.23

Overall, women are the largest demographic targeted by these changes. An average of

one in five women have gone to a Planned Parenthood clinic for care at least once in their

lifetime.24 An estimated 130,000 to 630,000 women would lose access to care.25 Of the 6.2

million women nationwide who receive contraception from health care providers, 1.6 million of

them obtain it from a Planned Parenthood Center.26 If these alternative clinics are no longer

operational, other health providers would have to increase their caseloads by over 70% to

mitigate the loss of services for over 1.5 million people.27

4
 An example of the detrimental effects of defunding Planned Parenthood can be found in

Texas, where reproductive rights have been a controversial and heated debate for decades. Texas

defunded Planned Parenthood and similar Title X providers in the state by cutting them from the

Women’s Health Program.28 In doing so, an estimated 30,000 Texan women lost access to care.

The first 18 months left women to depend solely on other state Medicaid facilities which led to a

decrease in prescribed contraception and a 27% increase in pregnancy.29 This example provides

evidence of the larger societal cost in enacting these policies, which show an increase in

vulnerability of women’s health. A one-size-fits-all approach to health care is not realistic nor

would it benefit women who use this type of care.

There are also economic concerns when analyzing the effects of these policies. Over the

past decades, the increased availability of family planning methods have allowed women to earn

higher income and have more of a presence in the workforce.30 The initial availability of birth

control in the 1970s, contributed to a 30% growth in the proportion of women in skilled-labor

jobs between 1970 and 1990. During this time period, birth control allowed women to wait

longer to have children, therefore, women had more opportunities to pursue higher education or

5
alternate career paths.31 The increase of pregnancies and other reproductive health concerns,

could severely impact a woman’s career and income. This predicament could force her to depend

on more aid from the government, or would cause a financial strain on her, which can also

endanger the woman’s health even further. The CBO, or the Congressional Budget Office,

estimated that reduced family planning due to defunding Planned Parenthood would cost the

federal government $130 million over a decade because of increased unintentional pregnancies.32

The potential savings accumulated when

providing alternatives for women when

they have unintended pregnancy would

be around $15 billion.33

As stated previously, these

Planned Parenthood facilities are the only

places of care for thousands of women,

and with the expulsion of these facilities,

women would be forced to seek other

primary care centers. This would cause an increase in demand for these other centers, since

Planned Parenthood patients would need to transfer their primary care to alternate health care

facilities. Consequently, these alternate centers would be overwhelmed and underprepared for

this surge of new patients. As an example of the economic repercussions, in Midland County,

Texas, this caused a 537% increase in cases.34 In states with large populations like Nevada,

where 22,000 people rely on Planned Parenthood, the stretch of resources and the increased

demand could cause many adverse effects.35 This increase not only creates chaos for these other

6
providers, but it could also cause women to go without care due to the lack of available

appointments or doctors’ availability.

Fighting Back
The Plan to Take Back Funding
The idea to defund Planned Parenthood is rooted in the spread of misinformation that

Planned Parenthood is only for abortions. These policies and false information further stigmatize

abortions, and by doing so, other services are put in jeaopardy. Though reproductive health has

been a controversial topic for years, the start of these specific policies was in 2015, when a

deceptive series of videos were released conveying misleading statements and practices of

Planned Parenthood.36 Since then, many state lawmakers have been trying to reduce the amount

of government funding allocated to Title X grant recipients, including Planned Parenthood.37

Policies aimed at defunding Planned Parenthood due to abortion concerns, must be lifted

and taken off the table for legislators. Many states during Trump’s Administration term have

pushed for and even implemented very restrictive policies that affect many clinics. Anti-abortion

restrictions related to public funding exist in eighteen states, with nine states specifically

restricting Title X funding.38 Fifteen states restrict family planning funds of some kind to

abortion service centers and its’ affiliated reproductive health centers.39

The elimination of these Title X policies would reestablish full funding to Planned

Parenthood. State legislators must be restricted on the laws they are allowed to pass, and the

funding they can allocate. When it comes to health measures, these states should not have the

authority to make hazardous decisions. The federal government needs to pass legislation that

7
emulates the same reassurance as provided by the historic Roe v. Wade decision, that deemed

abortion a woman’s legal choice.40

States could also

choose not to support these

new policies and provide

funding in order to

supplement the funds being

taken away. Seven states

have refused Title X

funding, and have covered

those using the services, by

taking away the confining legislation and providing alternate funding.41 Illinois’s Governor J.B.

Pritzker notes that his decision to take away Title X funding in the state will stand, and he will

fight for a federal solution to this problem. He goes on to say, “We will make sure that access to

these services remains available, because in Illinois, we trust women.”42 Illinois and twenty other

states are continuing to fight these policies in court, and find ways to make up for this loss of

important services.

To carry out the processes mentioned above, the most basic way to promote change is to

be conscious of voting decisions. Voting for state legislators, similar to Governor Pritzker, that

support funding of Planned Parenthood and Title X affiliates, helps to keep funding and services

available for everyone. Since legislators are the ones making these restrictive policies and

reducing funding, voting for more progressive candidates would prove beneficial toward

establishing funding. For women to have full access to Planned Parenthood, it must be funded

8
well and equivalent to its prior funding amount, and legislation is the only way that can be

accomplished.

Examples of the Past

Landmark Legislation
Evidence of similar historic legislative decisions that posed change, such as the Civil

Rights Movement motivating the Civil Rights Act of 196443, the Women’s movement

establishing the rights of women through gender discrimination laws44, and the Supreme Court

decision for allowing gay marriage45, have all stemmed from advocating for these causes, and

voting in the right legislation to get the job done. The continous campaigning, advocating and

protesting of these predecessors have created examples of how to use legislation to the advantage

of those trying to get things done.

Planned Parenthood had to step away from the Title X program, since the regulations do

not coincide with the groups values and beliefs in their services.46 The gap now created by

stepping away from the Title X program has caused Planned Parenthood to raise their copays in

some places, and reach out to private donors.47 Several Planned Parenthood clinics have closed,

in light of the policies. New York sets the example of how to provide support and funding to

Planned Parenthood, even with these policies still in place.48 Two clinics in New York were set

to shut down, but Public Health Solutions cancelled those plans and instead committed to

providing the extra funding needed to keep them open. The New York Governor, Andrew

Cuomo, also signed legislation safeguarding the Roe v. Wade court decision, and he even went

further and permitted late-term abortions to women facing fatal conditions due to pregnancy.49

9
 The disadvantage to this approach is that historic decisions traditionally take an

exorbitant amount of time to come to fruition. The Civil Rights Movement lasted for about

twenty years50 and the Women’s Rights Movement has been going on for decades, and is still

continuing today.51 The speed of these processes depends upon the amount of participation and

recognition. Involvement in several advocacy groups like, the Planned Parenthood Action Fund52

and campaigns including #IStandWithPP53, are the main proponents that will help promote

funding for thousands of women across the nation. These groups often lobby for Planned

Parenthood and Title X, which makes it easier to get responses from state legislation.

Conclusion
What the Future Holds
“The basic freedom of the world is a woman’s freedom,” as quoted by Margaret Sanger,

the Founder of Planned Parenthood.54 Denying funding to Planned Parenthood is detrimental to

the thousands of people who rely on their services for their everyday needs. Defunding Planned

Parenthood would threaten the lives of vulnerable and impoverished communities, who view the

organization as an essential medical facility. These regulations enacted by conservative leaders

10
and groups, must be lifted, and further legislation must eliminate the chances of these funds

being taken away again. The fight against regulation that targets certain demographics is not

over, nor are those fighting for it backing down. Through patience and civil discourse, the right

steps can be established to solve this problem of misjustice to underserved communities.

11
 References

1
Visco, Katie, “How Planned Parenthood Saved My Life,” eVIF (2017): accessible at
https://www.eivf.org/post/how-planned-parenthood-saved-my-life.
2
“‘Defunding’ Planned Parenthood, Defined,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. (2020):
accessible at https://www.istandwithpp.org/defund-defined.
3
“We Are Planned Parenthood.” Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc., (2019): accessible at
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/2e/da/2eda3f50-82aa-4ddb-acce-
c2854c4ea80b/2018-2019_annual_report.pdf.
4
Ibid.
5
Schweizer, Grace, “In Need of Reduced-Cost Health Services? Here's What You Can Get at Planned
Parenthood,” The Penny Hoarder (2017): accessible at https://www.thepennyhoarder.com/save-
money/planned-parenthood-services/.
6
Ibid.
7
Ibid.
8
Sobel, Laurie, Alina Salganicoff, and Brittni Frederiksen, “New Title X Regulations: Implications for
Women and Family Planning Providers,” The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (2019): accessible at
https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/new-title-x-regulations-implications-for-women-
and-family-planning-providers/.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Belluck, Pam, “Trump Administration Blocks Funds for Planned Parenthood and Others Over Abortion
Referrals,” The New York Times (2019): accessible at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/health/trump-
defunds-planned-parenthood.html.
13
Greene, Greg, “The Trump-Pence Administration's Latest Attempt to ‘Defund’ Planned Parenthood,
Explained,” Planned Parenthood Action Fund (2019): accessible at
https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/blog/from-the-trump-pence-administration-a-stealthy-new-
attack-on-reproductive-health-care?_ga=2.69350864.1779449481.1586481450-8521872.1586023240.
14
Belluck, “Trump Administration Blocks Funds for Planned Parenthood and Others Over Abortion
Referrals”
15
Sobel, Laurie, Alina Salganicoff, and Brittni Frederiksen, “New Title X Regulations: Implications for
Women and Family Planning Providers”
16
“4 Groups That Would Be Disproportionately Hurt by ‘Defunding’ Planned Parenthood,” Planned
Parenthood Action Fund (2020): accessed at https://www.istandwithpp.org/defund-defined/4-groups-
would-be-disproportionately-hurt
17
“4 Groups That Would Be Disproportionately Hurt by ‘Defunding’ Planned Parenthood” Planned
Parenthood Action Fund (2020)
18
Editorial Board, “Opinion | Trump Just Won a Battle with Planned Parenthood. Thousands of Women
Will Pay,” The Washington Post (2019): accessed at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-
just-won-a-battle-with-planned-parenthood-thousands-of-women-will-pay/2019/08/24/8dbcff94-c516-
11e9-b5e4-54aa56d5b7ce_story.html.

12
19
“4 Groups That Would Be Disproportionately Hurt by ‘Defunding’ Planned Parenthood” Planned
Parenthood Action Fund (2020)
20
Ibid.
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
Ibid.
24
“‘Defunding’ Planned Parenthood, Defined,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. (2020)
25
Kliff, Sarah, “Stat Check: No, Women Couldn't Just ‘Go Somewhere Else’ If Planned Parenthood
Closed,” Vox (2015): accessed at https://www.vox.com/2015/9/24/9373721/planned-parenthood-go-
somewhere-else.
26
Hasstedt, Kinsey, “Beyond the Rhetoric: The Real-World Impact of Attacks on Planned Parenthood and
Title X,” Guttmacher Institute (2019): accessed at https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2017/08/beyond-
rhetoric-real-world-impact-attacks-planned-parenthood-and-title-x.
27
Belluck, “Trump Administration Blocks Funds for Planned Parenthood and Others Over Abortion
Referrals”
28
“We’ve Already Seen What Happens When Patients Lose Access to Care,” Planned Parenthood Action
Fund (2018): accessed at https://www.istandwithpp.org/defund-defined/when-patients-lose-access-care.
29
Ibid.
30
Flynn, Andrea. “How Family Planning Helps the Economy and Women's Careers.” Atlantic Media
Company (2015): accessed at https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/planned-parenthood-
economic-benefits/405922/.
31
Ibid.
32
Kliff, Sarah, “Stat Check: No, Women Couldn't Just ‘Go Somewhere Else’ If Planned Parenthood
Closed,” Vox (2015)
33
Flynn, Andrea. “How Family Planning Helps the Economy and Women's Careers.” Atlantic Media
Company (2015)
34
“Planned Parenthood,” Govinfo (2015): accessed at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CREC-2015-
08-03/pdf/CREC-2015-08-03-senate.pdf
35
Ibid.
36
“State Family Planning Funding Restrictions,” Guttmacher Institute (2020): accessed at
https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-family-planning-funding-restrictions.
37
Ibid.
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
40
“Roe v. Wade Is Decided,” A & E Television Networks (2009): accessed at
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/roe-v-wade.
41
Ducharme, Jamie, “What Happens Now That Planned Parenthood Is Leaving Title X,” Time (2019):
accessed at https://time.com/5655500/planned-parenthood-title-x-funding/.
42
Ibid.
43
History.com Editors, “Civil Rights Movement Timeline,” A&E Television Networks (2017): acessed at
https://www.history.com/topics/civil-rights-movement/civil-rights-movement-timeline.
44
Milligan, Susan, “Stepping Through History,” U.S. News & World Report (2017): accessed at
https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2017-01-20/timeline-the-womens-rights-movement-in-
the-us.

13
45
Liptak, Adam, “Supreme Court Ruling Makes Same-Sex Marriage a Right Nationwide,” The New York
Times (2015): acessed at https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/us/supreme-court-same-sex-
marriage.html.
46
McCammon, Sarah,“Planned Parenthood Withdraws From Title X Program Over Trump Abortion
Rule,” NPR (2019): accessed at https://www.npr.org/2019/08/19/752438119/planned-parenthood-out-of-
title-x-over-trump-rule.
47
Ellis, Nicquel Terry, “'Teetering on a Public Health Crisis.' New Title X Policy Forces Ohio Planned
Parenthood Clinics to Close,” Gannett Satellite Information Network (2019): accessed at
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/09/20/new-title-x-policy-funding-forces-ohio-
planned-parenthood-clinics-close/2345553001/.
48
Ibid
49
Ibid
50
Roe v. Wade Is Decided,” A & E Television Networks (2009)
51
Ducharme, Jamie, “What Happens Now That Planned Parenthood Is Leaving Title X,” Time (2019)
52
“Donate to Planned Parenthood Action Fund,” Planned Parenthood Action Fund (2020): accessed at
https://www.weareplannedparenthoodaction.org/onlineactions/6iOI0_HnUUmPu_6_SRgayg2?
sourceid=1006442&ms=4NALz2000K1N1A&gclid=Cj0KCQjw4dr0BRCxARIsAKUNjWS6p7DOubzd
UBtiPRf8dYWm9eo5UtrWcX4ugsH9h8UOE4nZPX--ExEaApr7EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds.
53
Puckett, Lily, “People Are Sharing Their Planned Parenthood Stories After Republicans Move to
Defund It,” Teen Vogue (2018): access at achttps://www.teenvogue.com/story/planned-parenthood-
hashtag-trending-paul-ryan.
54
Hardin, Garrett, Population, Evolution, and Birth Control: a Collage of Controversial Ideas, San
Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman, 1969.

Photo Citations

1. Crowd of Pink Colored Women: allure https://www.allure.com/story/planned-parenthood-pink-

out-day-2017-social-reactions
2. Breakdown of Affiliate Services Chart: Planned Parenthood
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/filer_public/2e/da/2eda3f50-82aa-4ddb-acce-
c2854c4ea80b/2018-2019_annual_report.pdf
3. Texas Protests of Defunding: NPR https://www.npr.org/2012/03/28/149473236/texas-feds-face-
off-over-planned-parenthood
4. Infographic Depicting Numbers of Poverty: The Nation
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/shutting-down-planned-parenthood-would-catapult-
women-into-poverty/
5. United States Map of Litigation Challenges: KFF https://www.kff.org/womens-health-
policy/issue-brief/litigation-challenging-title-x-regulations/
6. Women Protesting: Cosmopolitan https://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a28750926/what-you-
need-to-know-about-this-planned-parenthood-news/

14