Success for Another Year

I have been exploring the topic of whether or not the government should fund the institutes that provide women with free or reduced long-term contraceptives in the state of Colorado. I came across the article, “Organizations Pledge $2 Million in Funding to Successful Family Planning Initiative,” which is featured on the website of the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. After the private funding for family planning services came to an end, there were more than twelve different organizations that united and came up with $2 million to keep the programs afloat for another year. I read in the article that almost fifty percent of pregnancies in Colorado are unintended, and that the Colorado Family Planning Initiative is able to provide 6,000 IUDs to women across the state. Within seven years under the Colorado Family Planning Initiative, abortions and teen birth rates dropped a drastic 48 percent. There are even more funds that are supposed to be coming in
within the next few months.

              
 This article really supports the use of long-term contraceptives and contraceptive in general. I find it amazing that even after funds ran out, and the government questions the validity of funding these organizations, there are still many people that support the program and are willing to donate to it in order to keep it up and running. The first private donation may have been a significantly larger number, but I think that $2 million dollars is quite the number as well. I find it very noteworthy that the numbers of teen births and abortions has dropped 48 percent since the Initiative has been up and running. The drastic drop in the abortion rate is huge alone. I am intrigued by this article and the statistic within it, because so many organizations are supportive of family planning services.
              
 This article is different from my first three posts, because it shows another side of the plot, which is that the family planning services received donations and funds that allow them to be able to keep operating for another year. The other sources that I discussed either gave information about how people feel about funding IUDs, information on the contraceptives themselves, or discussed why funding for long-term birth control is an issue. I like this article because it shows how strongly people feel about keeping the Colorado Family Planning Initiative up and running.

              
 When I first began researching this topic, I was surprised that people would link IUDs and abortions, and I became curious to research further. Once I started researching, I realized that the link that some people had made was not the relative point; the relative point is whether or not the government should help fund the family planning services that provide women with affordable contraceptives. I learned that the Colorado Family Planning Initiative has significantly lowered the number of unwanted pregnancies, the number of teen births, and also the number of abortions in Colorado. I also learned that it is apparent that many people and organizations support these family planning services, because $2 million is not a number that suggests a lack of support.

                After all of my research, I want to argue that the government should support funding of IUDs. The statistics alone show that many positive things have come from the development of the Colorado Family Planning Initiative. Long-term contraceptives are a way to prevent unintended pregnancies, they are safe and effective, and they have drastically reduced the number of teen births and abortions. I find very little reason for the government to not be supportive of these organizations, and very little reason for the government to question the validity of supplying the funds to keep them going. 

Birth Control or Abortion?

In my last post, I discussed an article that talks about republicans opposing government funding for IUDs in the state of Colorado. In this post, I will discuss an article entitled, “Colorado Debates Whether IUDs are Contraception or Abortion,” featured in Health News from NPR. I have never correlated using IUDs with abortions until reading this article. I read in the article that upwards of 30,000 have received IUDs through the Colorado Family Planning Initiative for free, and that IUDs normally cost $500 or more. The Colorado Family Planning initiative received a private grant that amounted to $23 million. There is a bill trying to be pushed through the Colorado Senate to help fund this program, but it is difficult since the government has to decide where money should and should not be given. I read that the debate is because other birth control methods prevent the sperm and egg from meeting, but with an IUD, the sperm and egg meet and are then discarded from the body because the egg is not able to implant into the uterine walls. The article also points out, however, that the number of live abortions has reduced drastically. Since there is the argument that IUDs can be associated with abortion, many people oppose funding from the government.

                   This article is much different that the other articles that I chose to research. I was discussing this article just a bit with my instructor toward the beginning of this project and she pointed that the number of people to associate IUDs with abortions is a small number. I agree with her. There are definitely people that have the belief that an IUD could be compared to an abortion, but is this realistic? The fertilized egg has never actually implanted within the uterine walls with an IUD whereas the fetus is being removed from the uterus with an abortion. The other articles that I have explored show the pros and cons to funding IUDs, rather than attacking the device specifically. It has an interesting angle that gives me new perspective, but that doesn't mean that I would agree with the details held within.
                
                 I have mixed feelings about the view that this article shares. I will be the first to admit that it has always bothered me a bit that the sperm and egg do meet, but does this mean that there is conception if the egg has not implanted. What defines the beginning of life? There are different opinions about this. I used to believe that life begins when the sperm and egg meet, but does life actually begin if the egg has not implanted so that it can grow into a human being? The article discusses that the number of abortions was down by 34% in teens. This is a drastic number to look at. I see this as a good thing, not a negative thing. Many women are depending on the use of IUDs for long term birth control, especially since there are non-hormonal options available as well. How is this program supposed to continue to be able to provide women with free or reduced IUDs if they are being associated with birth control, which in turn prevents government funding? Has there been significant scientific investigation done to decide when exactly a human life begins? There are still cases in which fetuses that are killed within the womb, even at 39 weeks, end in no conviction because the fetus has not yet become a “person.” There is a lot to think about when trying to end a significant form of birth control from being funded by the government. 

Those Against Funding for IUDs

Contrary to the first article that I read, the next article that I read discusses the refusal of government funding and the effects from this. I interpret the main point of the article written by Tara Culp-Ressler, “ColoradoRepublicans Refuse to Fund Award-Winning IUD Program that Reduced Teen Births,” featured in Think Progress, as being to give more insight regarding the vote to eliminate IUDs. The article states that there was a significant drop in teen birth rates in Colorado. As I understand, the article explains that IUDs are an effective as well as recommended option for teens. Ressler explains that the Colorado Family Planning Initiative is in jeopardy because the private donation that started the initiative is running out, and now the funds from the government have been denied. Ressler also discusses that despite the fact that a small number of pro-life people compare IUDs to having an abortion, the number of abortions nationally would dissipate with the use of IUDs. I'm not sure that I would agree that using IUDs as a form of birth control can be compared to abortion. 

                It is stated in the article that “reproductive health professionals are not pleased with outcome of the legislative fight.” I find myself wondering who exactly these health professional are. I found it quite surprising that IUDs helped to contribute to “a staggering 40 percent drop in the state’s teen birth rate over the past five years.” This is a large number of babies that were prevented when unplanned. Was this number based solely on the use of IUDs, or was it based on other methods of birth control through family planning programs?

                I am questioning who the initial private donor that funded the start of the Colorado Planning Initiative might be? The article mentions that they will “be left scrambling for alternative funding sources.” Are there other sources that could be used, or maybe even a foundation set up specifically for those that are in support of funding for this type of birth control? I question whether or not all methods of receiving funds have been explored, or if this program was only waiting on government funding.  I think that the article is a biased by pointing the finger at Republicans, but there are some valid points offered as well.

The Correlation between Long-acting Birth Control and Pregnancy

I am ready to talk about birth control. The state of Colorado is debating whether or not Intrauterine Devices (IUDs) should be funded by the government, or if the roughly $2 million being currently funded should be cut and directed elsewhere. As a female and an off and on user of birth control, exploring this topic will give me more insight into whether or not there should be free or reduced pricing access to forms of reversible, long-term birth control such as IUDs. This topic affects women, unborn babies, daughters, mothers, wives, myself and more. The Colorado State Legislature isn’t taking away a woman’s right to choose by any means, but the purpose of this research is to decide whether or not I believe that removing government funding for IUDs would benefit or hurt women in the state of Colorado.

           I read an article that shared some interesting points. In the peer-reviewed scholarly article, “Adverse Birth Outcomes in Colorado: Assessing the Impact of a Statewide Initiative to Prevent Unintended Pregnancy,” featured in the American Journal of Health, the topics of risks and effects of unintended pregnancies, the Colorado Family Planning Initiative, long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC), and the association between having access to family planning and the outcome of births.  I read in the article that there are higher risks of low birth weight (LBW) and pre-term birth (PTB) when there is an unintended pregnancy. I wonder if other studies have been done that show results from a different standpoint, such as negative effects of birth control. It is stated in the article that there is a large number of unintended pregnancies that lead to live births. I am curious to hear more about these statistics and how unintended pregnancies can be prevented. As discussed by the authors, the Colorado Family Planning Initiative has the goals to have more women access family planning and also to have more women engage in the use of LARCs. According to this source, increasing the use of LARCs may be important in the future.  

            After reading this article, I am left wondering how many studies have been completed that link pre-term birth and other risk factors with unintended pregnancies. The article discusses how long-acting reversible contraceptives are safe and effective, so why would the government want to remove funding for this? What may be some arguments against funding for LARCs? I am wondering if there is already high access to family planning centers in the state of Colorado. Finally, I am left questioning whether or not long-term birth control is the only effective birth control, or if there are other options that would work as well.

Sources

Goldthwaite, Lisa M. “Adverse Birth Outcomes in Colorado: Assessing the Impact of a

Statewide Initiative to Prevent Unintended Pregnancy.” American Journal of Public

Health 105.9 (2015): 60-65. Academic Search Premier. Web. 21 Oct. 2015.