Supreme Court deals blow to two states' attempts to cut Planned Parenthood funding

a reply to: Wardaddy454

BTW, if its a states rights thing what they decide to do with their money, why is any court siding with PP on anything?

The courts aren't technically siding with Planned Parenthood, in this case, because the case wasn't brought by Planned Parenthood, but their clients, and the clients of all the doctors' offices and clinics that would not see any Medicaid reimbursements, therefore could no longer service the clients.

A majority of lower court rulings, implicitly affirmed today, have said that Medicaid patients have a right to sue to challenge a state’s decision to remove their doctor as a qualified provider.

“We are pleased that lower court rulings protecting patients remain in place," said Planned Parenthood president Dr. Leana Wen in a statement. "Every person has a fundamental right to health care, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn."

abcnews.go.com...

Sorry that I didn't make that clear in my last post.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: SR1TX

I never say this to ATS members but you get the honor.

I don’t think I like you very much. You seem very ignorant and intolerant of others life choices.
Sorry but not really bro

Pro-life vs pro-choice. One is gonna seem intolerant to the other.

I got that part. I’m pro both as in I just enjoy reading other people’s opinions.
I should have said that I was referring to all of that users post in past threads as well as this one.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Wardaddy454

BTW, if its a states rights thing what they decide to do with their money, why is any court siding with PP on anything?

The courts aren't technically siding with Planned Parenthood, in this case, because the case wasn't brought by Planned Parenthood, but their clients, and the clients of all the doctors' offices and clinics that would not see any Medicaid reimbursements, therefore could no longer service the clients.

A majority of lower court rulings, implicitly affirmed today, have said that Medicaid patients have a right to sue to challenge a state’s decision to remove their doctor as a qualified provider.

“We are pleased that lower court rulings protecting patients remain in place," said Planned Parenthood president Dr. Leana Wen in a statement. "Every person has a fundamental right to health care, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn."

abcnews.go.com...

Sorry that I didn't make that clear in my last post.

Well again, Planned Parenthood is not a primary care provider.

I don't know how it works in Planned Parenthood, but is each visitor assigned the same "doctor" for every visit? If not, I don't see how one can claim "their doctor".

I also find this interesting.

"States may not terminate providers from their Medicaid program for any reason they see fit," the court said in its majority opinion, "especially when that reason is unrelated to the provider’s competence and the quality of the healthcare it provides."

Now, Planned Parenthood claims that if its held to the same health and surgical standards as any other regular provider, well, that would just ruin Planned Parenthood. Leana Wen asserted as much. When required to bring their standards up to par, some facilities just close. Planned Parenthood Of Missouri V Danforth seems to be one such case, where Missouri required abortion providers to meet standard requirements. Not just Planned Parenthood, but all.

So far a federal appeals court is letting the regulations stand, and Planned Parenthood is claiming this would leave one Planned Parenthood site as the only abortion provider in the state. I'm not hearing much out of Missouri about lack of access to abortion providers.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody

Amendment IV
…

...is not legislation, it's the Constitution, which is why you don't need additional laws passed. Roe vs. Wade also dealt with the Constitution which is why you don't need any additional legislation passed.

had congress written a law to protect abortion roe v wade would not be necessary
if it is on solid legal footing why the fear of writing a law?

'Fear'? It's not needed. If you don't like abortion I get it, just stop with the semantics about passing laws when I gave you a link on how a Supreme Court ruling actually applies in the real world.

You know, its a shame the Roe v Wade was based on a lie.

Even more importantly, religion is based on a lie, and it has influenced way too many governmental decisions. I'm glad this one was able to see past it, for once. Because, at least be honest, that is the source of the division on this.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

have you even gone to a doctor and they decided that they needed an xray and they sent you someplace to get one??
haven't been to a doctor in a long time but I imagine there are still a few that aren't within a large conglomerate "clinic" that in houses everything.

originally posted by: okrian

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody

Amendment IV
…

...is not legislation, it's the Constitution, which is why you don't need additional laws passed. Roe vs. Wade also dealt with the Constitution which is why you don't need any additional legislation passed.

had congress written a law to protect abortion roe v wade would not be necessary
if it is on solid legal footing why the fear of writing a law?

'Fear'? It's not needed. If you don't like abortion I get it, just stop with the semantics about passing laws when I gave you a link on how a Supreme Court ruling actually applies in the real world.

You know, its a shame the Roe v Wade was based on a lie.

Even more importantly, religion is based on a lie, and it has influenced way too many governmental decisions. I'm glad this one was able to see past it, for once. Because, at least be honest, that is the source of the division on this.

Well are we talking religion or organized religion?

The former is a practice of faith, and cannot be considered a lie. That would require proof. It can, does, and has influenced many decisions in many instances, good and bad, and is a source of morality through the ages.

Organized religion is a different beast, and I tend to like the smaller local churches as opposed to the mega churches.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Wardaddy454

have you even gone to a doctor and they decided that they needed an xray and they sent you someplace to get one??
haven't been to a doctor in a long time but I imagine there are still a few that aren't within a large conglomerate "clinic" that in houses everything.

The doc in a box I visit has an X-ray machine, a CAT scan machine, and an MRI machine. I doubt he has the funds that Planned Parenthood has.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

more than likely, your doc in a box is one of many docs working in the same office complex and he is just partial owner of those machines. maybe I am just old, but I remember being sent for xrays that my kids needed, along with other tests...
some of them I ended up having to travel an hour's drive to the university hospital in a neighboring city.
and, if that is the only machines your doctor has, he can't do a mammogram either???

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Because PP does offer OTHER services--such as birth control in the form of the pill, shots, diaphragms, condoms; PAP testing; STD testing, etc--for free or on an income-based sliding scale. It's an effort to get low-income people who might use "I can't afford it" as an excuse to actually use birth control rather than having a baby per year and to get tested for STDs instead of passing along chlamydia and gonorrhea. Abortion, however, is not and never has been free.

originally posted by: riiver
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Because PP does offer OTHER services--such as birth control in the form of the pill, shots, diaphragms, condoms; PAP testing; STD testing, etc--for free or on an income-based sliding scale. It's an effort to get low-income people who might use "I can't afford it" as an excuse to actually use birth control rather than having a baby per year and to get tested for STDs instead of passing along chlamydia and gonorrhea. Abortion, however, is not and never has been free.

All of which can be sought from other actual primary care providers that accept medicaid. Also, one Planned Parenthood facility in Iowa was caught committing $28 million worth of medicaid fraud. Stands to reason that more could do the same. Can you prove that someone couldn't make a fraudulent medicaid claim to circumvent the hyde amendmant by claiming life endangerment or rape/incest?

And they'll have babies once per year because they'll get $1000 per child.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Wardaddy454

more than likely, your doc in a box is one of many docs working in the same office complex and he is just partial owner of those machines. maybe I am just old, but I remember being sent for xrays that my kids needed, along with other tests...
some of them I ended up having to travel an hour's drive to the university hospital in a neighboring city.
and, if that is the only machines your doctor has, he can't do a mammogram either???

I didn't know a one story building slightly larger than a 3 bedroom 2 bath house could be considered an office complex.
And I don't know if he has a mammogram or not. I am not a woman, nor do I go snooping around looking for exposed breasts.

ETA: I do see many women of different ages from time to time. I wonder why they don't go to Planned Parenthood, my wait times would be significantly shorter.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454
I don't have to do anything. According to many here on ATS, Kavanaugh will be doing it.

Doubtful considering his stance on this case.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

first, planned parenthood doesn't just serve the medicaid community, they also serve the uninsured using a sliding scale, which sometimes slides all the way to being free!! how many of those primary doctors are willing to provide these services at no cost, heck, alot of them don't even want to take the medicaid patients! can you guarantee that all those medicaid patients will go to those primary caregivers or are they still gonna show up at the planned parenthood clinic only, they will just say they are uninsured and be getting the services under title x, or using that sliding scale and getting steep discounts or free services? some have even suggested that hey, they get plenty of money, they can just provide free services to the poor.... well, that describes many of the healthcare providers today, some of which make much more than planned parenthood, why don't they all just start providing free services to the poor and eating the costs, or what is more likely, raising the rates for those who can pay!!
alot of doctors, hospitals, and other providers get caught committing medicaid fraud. some for far more than $28 million.
one pp clinic shouldn't be a reason to close refuse all of them medicaid participation. heck can you prove that your local hospital ain't performing needless surgeries just to collect medicaid money? or heck, not performing the surgeries but just charging for them.... because this happens also!!!

originally posted by: headorheart
1. This is not about abortion.
2. Abortions are not federally funded.
3. Not all abortions are strictly murdering of the innocence.

2) Then why did you state this ?

One, I agree that a state shouldn't be able to terminate Medicaid health care for any reason they see fit

Get it ?

a reply to: Wardaddy454

ETA: I do see many women of different ages from time to time. I wonder why they don't go to Planned Parenthood, my wait times would be significantly shorter.

planned parenthood doesn't provide the healthcare they need at the moment? they have good insurance and wouldn't benefit from planned parenthood's sliding scale. they can afford a better quality of healthcare? there isn't a planned parenthood that is as close to them as your doctor's office? they like to have all their medical records in one place and not spread around?
does you doctor even take medicaid patients???

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Hey, I was just answering the comment about why are they always located in low-income areas.

All of which can be sought from other actual primary care providers that accept medicaid.

Yes, you can get those things--well, probably not condoms--from a primary care provider who takes medicaid. If you can find one who takes medicaid (not so easy where I'm located). But you do know that a huge number of people too poor to see a doctor for anything still don't qualify for medicaid, right? In my state, if you're an adult and you're not disabled or a pregnant woman, it's practically impossible to get medicaid. The income limit used to be $299 per month as of 2009 or 10; I think it increased to a whopping $350 or so since then. So there are plenty of people who can't use medicaid to get birth control...which is one of the reasons PP is so often located in low-income areas.

Also, one Planned Parenthood facility in Iowa was caught committing $28 million worth of medicaid fraud. Stands to reason that more could do the same. Can you prove that someone couldn't make a fraudulent medicaid claim to circumvent the hyde amendmant by claiming life endangerment or rape/incest?

And they'll have babies once per year because they'll get $1000 per child.

...And none of that really has anything to do with what I posted, which again, was simply an answer to the question of why Planned Parenthoods are so often located in low-income neighborhoods.

On topic and in response to the OP:
I'm glad to see all the fear-mongering with regard to Justice Kavanaugh swinging the court to overturn Roe v Wade getting a wet blanket thrown on it. From his stance on this, it looks like the extremist left will have to find something new to freak out about. (Remember all the hysterical "omg, stock up on birth control now, ladies! Trump's going to take the pill from you" threads and articles that flooded the internet not so long ago?)

a reply to: headorheart

"The point at which an abortion becomes late-term is often related to the "viability" (ability to survive outside the uterus) of the fetus. Sometimes late-term abortions are referred to as post-viability abortions." - Google

A woman having a late term abortion for medical purposes is called a cesarean section.

unless they insert a stainless steel pair of scissors and sever the spinal chord then use a vacuum to suck the brains out and collapse the skull then dismember it and sell the parts for medical research.... then its a late term abortion.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

...is not legislation, it's the Constitution

it is the original legislation
interesting how all those other amendments got added some even got taken away, that is how legislation works

'Fear'? It's not needed.

it is sorely needed, our judicial was not intended to legislate

If you don't like abortion I get it, just stop with the semantics about passing laws when I gave you a link on how a Supreme Court ruling actually applies in the real world.

interesting you bring this up
I happen to back the side of a womans choice
That has nothing to do with a court ruling vs a law from congress
All congress has to do is pass a law, interesting in this day and age they do not have the stones or backing to do so

a reply to: shooterbrody
they do have a law that prevents federal funds from being used for abortion with certain exemptions as far health of mother, baby, incest, rape, ect. and they enforce that law. can't help it if some just desire to ignore reality!

a reply to: dawnstar

I was posting about a law that protects a womans right to choose, so that the courts do not get to continually decide what the law is or isnt.
I dont understand why that would be so difficult.
As to the use of tax dollars, once it is out of my hands and in the govenments imo it is up to them to decide how it is used.
Roads, military, healthcare all come from the same taxpayer funds. Attempting to carve out an exception for one imo is folly.