Frequently when I meet someone who’s not from Wisconsin, they seem to immediately envision that I grew up on farm, rode a tractor to school, and milked cows in my free time. Clearly, for those of you born and raised here too, you know that’s not the case. Wisconsin — pardon my lack of eloquence — is pretty rad. The state has a history that is rich with culture and diversity, which is why when Wisconsin makes national political news over “controversial” issues, it makes my head and heart smile.
Most recently, Wisconsin has found itself in a debate over the state’s Medicaid program because it wants to expand birth control coverage for low-income residents, including free contraception, Pap smears and testing for sexually transmitted diseases. Wisconsin applied in June for federal funding to raise the qualifying income minimum from $21,600 to $32,490, hoping to extend the program’s reach.
With all the criticism that has arisen from conservative groups, this must be the first time any state has tried to receive funding for this cause, right? Wrong. “Twenty-six other states already provide free contraception and other reproductive health services through a Medicaid pilot to lower-earning women who otherwise wouldn’t qualify,” according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Interestingly enough, half of those states are from the Midwest, too: Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota and Missouri.
Perhaps my understanding and support of this funding is generational, but the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases and reproductive issues for low-income individuals just seems logical.
Wisconsin’s federal Medicaid funding reimburses 90 percent of the cost of most family-planning services, so with 53,000 people reciving this aid in the state, Wisconsin spent $18.4 million on the program in 2008, according to WSJ. In comparison, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services estimates that the program prevented 11,064 unplanned pregnancies, which means they saved an estimated $139.1 million in expenses that would have gone to the birth and care of those children. As Jason Helgerson, Wisconsin’s Medicaid Director, told The Wall Street Journal, “Regardless of your political stripes, I don’t think anybody wants [unplanned pregnancies].”
The request for extra funding has been called “insane” by Julaine Appling, president of Wisconsin Family Action, but what’s insane is that anyone would oppose the expansion of a program that is aiming to better the health and lives of individuals who do not have access to the same precautionary care as everyone else. To only care about a woman after she already has an unwanted pregnancy is irresponsible. And what about the children? They didn’t have a say in the matter, and they are most likely being born into a familial and financial situation that cannot support and nurture them to adulthood. Had their mother been given access to birth control, she could have waited until she was emotionally and financially ready and able to become pregnant.
On that same note, a substantial number of unplanned pregnancies are teenage pregnancies. According to documents from the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, eight percent of the births that occurred in 2008 in Wisconsin were to teen moms (less than 20 years of age), accounting for 6,096 births. Pregnant teenagers are more likely to smoke during pregnancy and their babies are at a higher risk to have a low birth weight and die in infancy.
That being said, it’s absolutely puzzling that one of the key details that is upsetting critics is that this Medicaid program is available without parental notification to residents at least 15 years old. A multitude of factors contribute to the need for this availability, but one of the biggest is the lack of support and honesty teens receive from their parents when it comes to sex. An alarming number of parents are too timid to have “the talk” with their children, which is where Medicaid picks up the slack by giving these teens the resources they need to make responsible decisions if and when they choose to be sexually active.
Thankfully, although to the dismay of the state’s conservatives, the Democrats currently dominate the legislature and the governor’s office, leaving hope that this program will push its way through.
According to WI statutes, if a 15yo is in need of birth control then she is being raped…and her parents shouldn’t be notified!?
Where’s the data to show that an “alarming number of parents are too timid to have ‘the talk’ with their children?”
The request is to expand Wisconsin’s Family Planning Medicaid Waver program to 15-44 yo women at 300% of federal poverty level – meaning any 15-44yo woman who is making less than about $31,000. Why should taxpayers fund birth control for adult women with that kind of income? And this doesn’t even take into account their husband/parents/partners’ income. The woman herself just has to be making less than 300% of federal poverty level.
And Wisconsin was the first state to request the expansion and permanent status of the program under Obama’s health care reform.
Just a few facts…
To clarify your “facts”, Curly, the family must meet the income requirements. The only cases in which it is based on an individual’s income is if the individual is the only member of the household.
And there are plenty of 15 year olds who need birth control for reasons other than contraception. It is used to treat a number of conditions including endometriosis, PMS, irregular or extremely heavy periods, and more.
Most importantly, if teenagers are having sex (and studies done by the CDC tell us 45% of Wisconsin high school students are), isn’t it better that they protect themselves from pregnancy rather than finding themselves soon-to-be teen parents or soon-to-be seeking an abortion? If a 15 year-old is having sex with an adult, it should certainly be reported to the appropriate authorities. But find me a prosecutor who is really going to prosecute 45% of all teens for having sex with other teenagers.
With a teen pregnancy rate of 39 per every 1000 teen girls in Wisconsin, we can’t afford not to ensure all girls and women in our state have access to birth control.
Correction on poverty level eligibility: if the woman is not a minor – “For minors, parents’s income is not counted”
http://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/badgercareplus/pubs/p-10068.pdf
“For minors, parents’s income is not counted”
Which makes sense, as the parents aren’t the ones getting the birth control.
“According to WI statutes, if a 15yo is in need of birth control then she is being raped…and her parents shouldn’t be notified!?”
She may also be committing rape, if her partner is under 18. It’s a stupid statute and has no bearing on this. Also, as was pointed out, birth control does not necessarily mean sexual activity, and there are legal sexual activities (based on the definitions of “sexual contact” in the WI statute) in which teenagers can engage that have a pregnancy risk e.g. simultaneous masturbation without partner-to-partner contact that results in semen contacting the inner folds of the vulva or the vagina. There’s also the risk of rape: should teenage women not be able to protect themselves from pregnancy as a precautionary measure in case they actually are raped? Finally, again, teenage women DO have sex, and taxpayers should pay for contraception for them because it’s a lot cheaper than taxpayers paying for group homes, foster care, or Welfare for them, to completely discount the human factor and put it in bottom-line-dollar language that y’all Republicans can appreciate.
“Why should taxpayers fund birth control for adult women with that kind of income?”
Because that kind of income may be sufficient to provide for said woman, hence being over Federal poverty level, but isn’t sufficient to support said woman AND a child, particularly when said woman’s income will drop drastically if she has to devote much of her time when she might otherwise be working to caring for said child and/or spend a considerable amount on third-party child care in addition to the direct costs of food, clothing, medical care, schooling, etc. for the child.
“And Wisconsin was the first state to request the expansion and permanent status of the program under Obama’s health care reform.”
There is no “Obama’s health care reform”. Congress recently passed a largely-Republican-penned (it’s nearly identical to what they proposed back in ’93-’94 under Clinton) health INSURANCE reform law, but no health care reform, and certainly not what Obama proposed. I assume that’s to what you’re referring; if so, it’s a serious mischaracterization. Also, so what? How is that at all relevant? We’re the first one’s requesting a program expansion that’s similar/identical to existing program expansions in 26 other states since the latest health insurance reform bill passed; why does that matter?
To preempt any religious moralizers who want to join this discussion: please keep your beliefs off of our bodies and let us go to Hell in peace. We won’t force your children to use birth control or have abortions if you won’t force ours to not do so.
If I can stomach a plurality of my tax dollars going to a military-industrial complex I wish to dismantle and a police force that primarily serves to protect the wealthy from the poor, then you can put up with a few bucks going toward contraception and even abortion, especially since it saves you money in the not-so-long run. If you wish to create some sort of low-tax, no-public-services-other-than-a-military Christian theocracy as a separate country, perhaps splitting the USA along the Mason-Dixon Line, I will whole-heartedly support you; until then, we need to get along under the same legal framework, and that requires compromise. Unfortunately, compromise requires evidence-based discussion, not thousands-of-years-old-and-now-socially-dysfunctional-ideology-based discussion, which is why we’re having such a problem with this stuff.