The State of Montana Paid for 43 Teen Births Last Year

by jhwygirl

That’s because the state’s low income health insurance plan for children through the age of 19 covers prenatal care, delivery and postnatal care for teen moms.

The cost? $720,000.

Yesterday, Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union filed suit against the State of Montana for its selective policies regarding denial of birth control, saying it is a violation of privacy and equal protection rights in the state constitution

What is their policy?

Montana Public Radio reported that teens insured through CHIP, part of Healthy Montana Kids, cannot obtain birth control if it’s being used only to prevent pregnancy, though they can get birth control to treat acne or heavy menstrual cycles.

Now, that makes sense.

And how did this happen? State Senator Keith Bales (a Republican) struck a deal in the last days of the session which removed funding for CHIP recipient’s birth control – but only when it’s used as birth control.

This really is the kind of stuff that is at stake here at the state level. Ya’all might not care to much for the national stuff, but I certainly hope everyone is paying attention to the state level. Make sure everyone you know is voting – shoot an email around, pick up the phone.

Get ‘er done, people It’s THIS important.

  1. I wonder what 43 males of similar age cost the state in medical CHIP coverage?

    • The Polish Wolf

      Well, I can tell you a certain 43 males (or maybe fewer) are at least equally responsible for that $720,000. Other than them, I imagine that males on average cost slightly more than females, just because males tend to engage in more high risk behaviors as teenagers, so they probably suffer more injuries and hospital stays.

  2. Pronghorn

    “The government shouldn’t be financing contraceptives for youth, because then that circumvents the family,” said Keith Bales, a state senator.

    On the one hand, the age of consent is 16; on the other, young women 16 to 19 are denied coverage for birth control to prevent pregnancy, but are covered for pregnancy and birth…? And the taxpayers, I’m sure, are ever so happy to pick up the $720,000 tab resting assured that “the family” has not been circumvented, but instead, a NEW low-income and perhaps single parent family has been created, necessitating the need for ever more safety net funding so that Republicans can go on the campaign trail claiming that state funding for addressing the issues surrounding poverty is “too great.”

    The American Taliban manifests itself in morality crusaders like Bales.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,675,944 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,737 other followers

  • October 2010
    S M T W T F S
  • Categories

%d bloggers like this: