Big Brother Wants to Manage Low-Income Women's Family Planning

If you thought that the Stupak amendment was the only attack on women's reproductive freedom included in the massive new health care reform, you were sadly mistaken.

The House health care bill (H.R. 3962) contains a provision in Section 1713 that allows the government to monitor and influence the childbearing decisions of low-income women. Under this new bill, Medicaid recipients who are pregnant for the first time or who have a child under two years of age will have government-mandated, non-medical visits from nurses in order to promote the government's reproductive goals for them.  Awesome.

So, what exactly does Big Brother have planned for the wombs of low-income women?  For starters, it would like to increase birth intervals between pregnancies (even though the the average family on welfare has only 1.8 children), increase economic self-sufficiency (despite the fact that the government's own data shows no link between family size and poverty), and reduce maternal and child involvement in the criminal justice system (thus perpetuating the stereotype that poor families literally breed criminals).

Listen, I have absolutely no problem with educating young, first-time mothers on family planning and contraception. In fact, I'd say I strongly support giving that crucial information to all women, mothers or not. I am also in favor of giving these women all the information they need to raise healthy children. What I take issue with is targeting low-income women and then treating their fertility like a problem the government must solve. I have a problem with the government coming up with parenting goals on your behalf. (Then, of course, there's the side issue of how ridiculous it is to start teaching women about family planning and contraceptives after they've already conceived.)

And where are the fathers in this scenario? Are they not at all responsible for childbearing choices, or are they just fine doing what they please while the women are accountable for birth control and parenting?

I have no doubt that the authors of this provision had good intentions when they wrote it, but that's not good enough. If you want women making educated choices for themselves and their families, you have to reach out to all women -- with useful information, not an attempt to impose an agenda -- ideally before they start having children. (Say, comprehensive sex education in schools?) I'm curious what you think: is this an efficient way to address a societal problem or an intrusion into the privacy of low-income women?

PHOTO CREDIT: ProgressOhio