Trump team to stop family-planning funding as it reviews whether it’s being used for DEI programs

[IwantToRetire]

The Trump administration is planning to freeze tens of millions of dollars in federal grants to organizations providing family planning and other reproductive health services, as it reviews whether the funds violate the president’s order to cease all government-backed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work.

A Health and Human Services spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal, which reported on the plan, that the department was reviewing grants to make sure they complied with the crackdown on DEI.

The freeze to the Title X program could impact as much as $120 million worth of grants to a network of roughly 4,000 clinics providing free and discounted pregnancy testing, contraception, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment, and evaluations and testing for infertility.

Planned Parenthood, whose affiliates could lose roughly $20 million if the paused grants are ultimately cut, reacted with alarm.

“The Trump-Vance-Musk administration wants to shut down Planned Parenthood health centers by any means necessary, and they’ll end people’s access to birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and more to do it,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America CEO Alex McGill Johnson told the newspaper.

https://www.aol.co.uk/trump-team-stop-family-planning-211853228.html

I guess because left politics is less authoritarian and repressive...

I can't formulate a response because I can't get my breath for laughing.

Oh I'm sorry, are left leaning parties and organisations now supporting the half of humanity that is oppressed and marginalised because we are female to have our own political identity, voice and movement again?

Thought not.

My thoughts exactly😂

Are you saying right wing parties are? Or more so that "the left"?

Did you want to explain how the vilainising emotive language is any different? Given not a single poster has yet provided a reasonable stat of children being sterilised that justifies attacking PP in that way, knowing how they are threatened already and now have a president pardoning people who have broken in and prevented women's access to healthcare clinics. Do you think such vilainising emotive language prevents or incites such actions?

This is one of those activists "there are lives lives being saved every minute you are committing the crime,” he said of the activists’ unauthorized entry into abortion clinics. “Every minute that a rescuer is inside the building, they are not killing babies.”

Do you not see how language around complex issues needs to be careful?

No. Nobody is. That's why some of us are so bloody angry

No.

That would have been obvious had you first read the post to which I was replying.

Yes, at least 35,000 vulnerable people and children are being medically harmed by this organisation. This is horrifying and must be stopped.

If another medical organisation went rogue and started selling hand removal as treatment for depression and amputated the hands of 35,000 vulnerable young people and children in the name of ‘care’ would you be equally as blithe about the numbers?

You refer to it as ‘gender affirming care’ but it’s not ‘care’ in any sense of the word. Giving vulnerable young people and children a huge and deliberate hormone imbalance is not ‘bodily autonomy’ - it is deliberately causing medical harm.

No one is cheering on the removal of reproductive rights for American women. Primary care doctors and pharmacists will still be supporting women with their reproductive issues and long term, a new organisation that is not rotten will be developed.

I’m mystified as to the you care so deeply about the welfare of one group of women but have little regard for another group of women and children who are having their health and reproductive capacity permanently damaged by this activist organisation.

American women can find alternative reproductive care providers. The affected children and young people will not be able to find alternative bodies when theirs are destroyed.

It's the abortion leash. The left yanks on it if we women start to think for ourselves

So why are you bringing up "the left" when the discussion is the actions of the right wing. It would only make sense if you were reasoning supporting the right based on this particular issue. Maybe someone could start a left wing party that encapsulates this issue while not making it their sole political objective, then you'd have the left wing home you say your missing, although there are currently quite a few left wing politician who are still in the parties while they have and espouse gender critical views so I'm not why you claim there is no left wing party including this issue.

What is the abortion leash?

Analogy with the urinary leash.

Missed the edit window to add this to my post...

Women (in the original sex based meaning) exist.

@suggestionsplease1 clearly recognises we are a marginalised group. We are the only group who bear the consequences of having a female reproductive system, and the only group who bear the consequences of the marginalisation, sexualisation and othering of female bodies in society, so why is it seemingly so hard to acknowledge that we are marginalised because of our sex and that Feminism came into existence in recognition of this fact?

We can support and sympathise with other marginalised groups and still exist as separate to them, and we should be able to say openly when we have different needs to other groups and to focus on what we need.

Why does "seeing commonalities amongst oppressed identities and likewise extends support" seem to require women, and only women, to not just see commonalities and extend support but subsume our own needs, our own advocacy and indeed our own separate existence in service of theirs?

One again - how many children to justify the accusations "PP are sterilising children" smear. How many of those 35k are children? I note you're trying to change the accusations to "PP are sterilising vulnerable adults" but how are you reconciling arguing for the removing the autonomy of adults in a way that doesn't argue against autonomy for abortion?

The fact you've jumped to hand removal is...a bit mind boggling. It's very hard on this thread for anyone to follow a conversation and defend their previous point without veering off topic or a crazy hypothetical. If you're convinced enough it is worth making millions of women lose access to healthcare now and wait for some mythical long term solution then surely you can defend that with facts instead of having to compare it limb removal..

I’m mystified as to the you care so deeply about the welfare of one group of women but have little regard for another group of women and children who are having their health and reproductive capacity permanently damaged by this activist organisation.

And I'm mystified you care so much about the reproductive capacity of a hypothetical unknown number of children and have such little disregard from the millions of women who currently only have PP to turn to. Your focus being solely on their ability to reproduce is a bit iffy given the agenda of the attacks on PP too. Maybe other people's reproductive choices are their own.

I guess because left politics is less authoritarian and repressive...

On yes…
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/maos-great-leap-forward-killed-45-million-in-four-years-2081630.html

Sigh.

The point is neither left nor right are supporting women. I am bringing the left only in the context of other posters bringing up the right, to highlight why the lazy assertion that women who disagree with genderism must be right wing is wrong.

And yes gender critical women exist in all in the mainstream UK left wing parties but by God they are having to fight to be there! The TWAW mantra is still the party line.

Given not a single poster has yet provided a reasonable stat of children being sterilised that justifies attacking PP in that way

How many children being sterilised do you think would justify pausing giving funds organisation until they stop doing so? A hundred children sterilised before they are able to comprehend what they have lost? A thousand? Ten thousand children? Please let us know what ball park figure you consider unacceptable.

Why do you need to bring up the left when people are justifiably outlining the right wing attacks on women's rights? Which left wing parties are attacking abortion rights? Why do you think party of women didn't run on a left wing platform out of interest, surely by your logic they should have to remove that line of attack from the right?

Such a nebulous question. I didn't make the assertion that children are being sterilised, perhaps those who have could tell us how many they believe it to be which justified them supporting PP being destroyed, then surely it's easier for me to agree or disagree with them when we know the scale. When you're advocating women affectively losing the right to abortion nationwide because there are no providers, are you saying that even 16 year old making a decision they could later regret is too many and therefore worth the sacrifice? If so, that's can be your opinion but your motivation certainly isn't protecting women's rights.

What does that have to do with Trump cutting access to healthcare for women?

And I'm mystified you care so much about the reproductive capacity of a hypothetical unknown number of children and have such little disregard from [sic] the millions of women who currently only have PP to turn to. Your focus being solely on their ability to reproduce is a bit iffy given the agenda of the attacks on PP too. Maybe other people's reproductive choices are their own.

Point 1 - "the millions of women who currently only have PP to turn to". There are providers other than PP. Let's take Nevada, which in November 2024 voted in favour of the right to abortion on demand up to foetal viability, and after that where medically indicated to "protect the life or health of the pregnant patient" by 63.46% versus 35.64% (and simultaneously voted for Trump).

There are 9 virtual providers serving the state and 4 in-person providers which are not PP.

Point 2 - "Maybe other people's reproductive choices are their own." So you think children, young people and adults who undergo procedures that effectively sterilise them are giving fully informed consent amd the consequences are on them. Interesting

It is the right who are cutting women's services in America. That's what this thread is about: The cuts to women's services in the US.

The whataboutery is pathetic.

The sacrifice of having to go to a different abortion provider?

PP is the biggest provider nationwide. There is no evidential basis to claiming their closure wouldn't impact women because you've named one state with other providers.

That's kind of how bodily autonomy works for adults, there's loads of procedures I don't think people should do but I'm not going to advocate for the state to prevent them doing it when the state can and will extend that to women's access to abortion. I haven't supported or argued against CSH, I'm saying if that's your focus over womens access to abortion care, and your happy for the nations largest provider to be scrapped, then women's rights aren't your priority

It was already established up thread that the government funding specifically excluded PPs work providing abortions.

So freezing that funding should have no effect at all on access to abortion via PP.

And government funding is being temporarily frozen. PP is not being destroyed - as noted above some of its work is not funded by the government at all.