Honest question: why does this cite say there are abou 1,200 FQHCs, and you say there are ten thousand more of them?
While prostate cancer truly is the exclusive domain of those born male, the other two items you mention are NOT “unique to woman”. Men also get breast cancer, and there is birth control used by men (condoms and vasectomy). Men are also financially (at a minimum) responsible for whatever children they sire, wanted or not.
Why would she, when Planned Parenthood fit her needs?
I’m not a big fan of “you haven’t been there” type arguments, but it’s hard not to be tempted by them in this case. Planned Parenthood is a part of many, many women’s lives. And it’s accessible and reliable in a way that the patchwork of semi-subsidized social services in this country isn’t (remember me taking the day off to go to the homeless clinic?). Given how vital reproductive health is to being a modern woman, it’s something to know that no matter what happens, Planned Parenthood will be there.
I know you don’t like abortion. But abortion is legal. It just sucks that you are trying to take away something that has worked very well for many women because you want to try to functionally ban abortion.
There are more birth control methods than the pill.
I’m also going to point out that in many states able-bodied adults no matter how poor do NOT qualify for Medicaid. Only kids do.
So, saying “insurance subsidies and Medicaid will cover the poor” is inaccurate. There are plenty of places in the US where Medicaid does not cover the average adult.
Precisely. If one admits “You should just not have sex, so no pills for you” as a valid argument, then one must equally admit “ITR champion’s wife should just suck it up and straighten out her head, so no pills for her”. Of course, the sensible conclusion is to reject both arguments, since they are both manifestly absurd. Trying to reject the one silly argument and embrace the other because the result serves one’s interests and prejudices simply won’t cut it.
That is exactly correct they do and provide other extremely useful services to women. Democrats rush to the defense, because they care about people. Anyone who has a problem with that, has no empathy for society and only for themselves.
Your cite only lists federally funded health care clinics. There are a lot more than 1200 FQHCs.
Here’s a map:
The fact remains, there are more than 15,000 clinics that provide comprehensive health care to women in the U.S. vs. <700 PP clinics.
That map doesn’t show 15k clinics. It probably shows 1200, since there are 1200, in fact (and 100 “look alike FQHCs”.) Cite
Here is that map with 6000 dots that size imposed on it:
If there were 15k dots on that map it would be green from sea to shining sea.
So, you’re mistaken there.
There are not 15k FQHCs. Can you cite the price differences and services provided between these extra non FQHCs, and the clinics you’re talking about? Because if you can’t, I don’t even know what point you’re trying to make.
In fact, where are you getting that number?
Please take a second, look at my links. It really does seem that you are wrong. There may be “other clinics” but they are not FQHCs or “look-alike FQHCs”.
Do you not care what people say?
I’m sure my Berkeley homeless clinic is on there. The process is that you arrive at five AM, and wait until the doctors arrive at eight. They stay until noon and treat as many people as they can up to that point. They have equipment on hand to treat common problems afflicting the homeless- skin problems, drug related issues, etc. Anything else needs a referral (they couldn’t help me, for example.)
I’m sorry, no, that is not “just as good” as Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is reliable, accessible, predictable, and targeted toward the needs of low income women. I’ve used it in multiple cities. It works for millions of people.
The local GLBT Health Center, or the Spanish-Language Kid’s Clinic, or the Center for Elderly Women, or the Berkeley Free Homeless Clinic are not adequate substitutes. These clinics already have their specialities and their client bases. Finding them, becoming a client, figuring out their systems, etc., is not a particularly straightforward task. And it’s a pointless one, considering that I can right now call the Planned Parenthood central phone line and get exactly what I need, reliably.
A number of women have come in to this thread and explained how Planned Parenthood has helped them. It is clearly serving people. Yes, if you live in a rural area, you may have a local health center that is closer, and these may be vital for rural areas. But 80% of Americans live in urban areas, and can get themselves downtown to Planned Parenthood rather than go to something closer that doesn’t fit their needs as well.
Not really, when it comes down to anecdotes from anonymous internet posters.
Do you mean like PP gives referrals for mammograms?
Only three million, rather than the 40 million served by community health care clinics.
Care to address my post?
So you- a man who has never had a Pap Smear, who has never needed to update his prescription to the pill, who has never contemplated his family history of breast cancer, who has likely never set foot in a women’s health clinic and will never need to- you of course are an expert in what works and doesn’t work for women. You know because you read an article once.
Not like us silly women, dealing with reproductive health our whole damn lives.
So why not provide more funding to all those clinics AND Planned Parenthood? Why eliminate funding for PP at all?
Community health care clinics are not designed for women’s needs. They have to have doctors that can treat all problems and all ages. So, for example, since the average physician cannot fit IUD’s, they may only have an OB/Gyn or NP who is trained to fit IUDs once a month and it may be on a day of the week that the woman has to work. In addition, they are unlikely to know all of the places available for a mammogram, and what deals they have for women who cannot afford them. Having a place that specializes in woman’s health care means that the providers are better trained in woman’s health care and more cognizant of how to navigate the system to get women the help they want.
Why not fund all of those clinics, and add the PP funding to them?
Care to address my post? Have you established that those clinics exist?
See post # 128. Your “cite” only refers to federally funded clinics. There are thousands more.
Yes. I know. Are those clinics the same cost as the federally funded ones?
If they cost much more than PP or the FQHCs, then you’ve failed to make a point. Got a cite?
Also, you said that there were thousands more of FQHCs, which was wrong. There are 1200 and 100 “look-alike” FQHCs.
Who cares? Nobody is owed “free” healthcare.