The Defunding of Planned Parenthood Emily Wood- WRT 205
by Emily Wood
1. Text #3: “Women’s experiences after Planned Parenthood’s exclusion from a family planning program in Texas”
1.1. Main Ideas: After the reduction in funds of Planned Parenthood in Texas many women are forces to find other care centers. Those who seek private care have many barriers to get through that they did not before. This includes unauthorized copays and unnecessary extra visits. This type of care is not beneficial to the people and should serve as a warning to the rest of the nation on why defunding Planned Parenthood is not a good idea. Women should not have to go through additional barriers to receive basic treatment when there is a way to prevent it.
1.2. Author: C. Junda Woo., Hasanat Alangir, Joseph E. Potter
1.2.1. Authors Credibility: Woo, Alangir, and Potter are research associates at the University of Texas
1.3. Source Genre: Peer Reviewed Journal Analysis: Since the work is a peer reviewed journal it gives the text some credibility. The text is reviewed by other experts in the field and all information is checked for validity. This means that it is a harder and longer process for the author to get it published but the reader knows it is valid.
1.4. Audience: The peer reviewed article is intended to be read by other scholars. This allows the author to provide more statistics, results or studies and in depth conversation that a scholar may want to use in their work.
1.5. Authors position/ethics: The authors are arguing that the nation should learn from Texas's mistake and not repeat it. They wants Planned Parenthood and other women's health care providers to keep their funding.
2. Text #4: “The Trump global gag rule: an attack on US family planning and global health aid”
2.1. Main Ideas: The article explains how in only Trumps fourth day in office he signed an executive order with implements an anti-abortion policy, called the gag rule. The policy prevents US family planning funds from going to foreign non-governmental organizations that provide abortion services or advising for abortion laws. The article is controversial because some believe that the gag rule does not reduce abortions. However, lack of funding means that there are less resources relating to abortion services that people can use which will result in less abortions being performed. This reduction in funding is an example of how Trump is reducing women’s health care services.
2.2. Author: Ann M. Starrs
2.2.1. Authors Credibility: Credible. Starrs is the President and CEO of Guttmacher Institute. The institute is is a research and policy organization.
2.3. Source Genre: Peer Reviewed Journal Analysis: Since the work is a peer reviewed journal it gives the text some credibility. The text is reviewed by other experts in the field and all information is checked for validity. This means that it is a harder and longer process for the author to get it published but the reader knows it is valid.
2.4. Audience: The peer reviewed article is intended to be read by other scholars. This allows the author to provide more statistics, results or studies and in depth conversation that a scholar may want to use in their work.
2.5. Authors Position/Ethics: The author is making an argument that Trumps global gag rule is bad for the nation. She wants Planned Parenthood and other women's health care providers to keep their funding.
3. Text #5: “These tweets show how common attacks on abortion clinics really are”
3.1. Main Ideas: The video and tweets from the same source highlight all the threats and false media that the Planned Parenthood organization has received over the years. Members of the organization, including the president, spoke about how the attacks give Planned Parenthood a bad image when they do not deserve it. In addition, the organization is scared of what certain protesters will do to get what they want, including harmful physical attacks on Planned Parenthood clinics. This shows how the media can influence public opinion on an organization and an issue.
3.2. Author: Sarah Kliff
3.2.1. Authors Credibility: Credible. Kliff is the senior Editor of VOX
3.3. Source Genre: Tweets and video (same webpage) Analysis: Tweets allows for opinions to be expressed online. Tweets are usually short and express a lot of opinion and emotion so that others can see how the person feels. By looking at tweets we can see how members of the public feels about the issue. The video shows how media often protrays Planned Parenthood by showing actual media clips. This is very usful because it is conversation that most people have access to and can influence their opinions on the topic.
3.4. Audience: The text is intended to be seen by a large audience of the general public. Tweets can be seen by anyone and often circulate quickly online to be seen by many. The tweets can get across a persons message in a timely manner.
3.5. Authors position/ethics: The author is making the argument that Planned Parenthood gets a false bad image because of comments on media sites.She wants Planned Parenthood and other women's health care providers to keep their funding.
4. Describes the problem as a larger women's health issue (not just about Planned Parenthood)
4.1. Connection: These articles discuss how the issue is larger than Planned Parenthood.The orders that are being put in place and the lack of funds doesn't just effect Planned Parenthood. It effects women's health care as a whole. Many other women's health care providers are closing or being forced to charge higher fees. This is making it more difficult for women to receive the care that they need across all providers.
5. President Trumps Actions
5.1. Connection: All of these sources include information on Trumps recent actions as President of the United States. Trump has signed several executive orders that are the reason for the defunding of Planned Parenthood. By referencing these executive orders and actions the articles all point out the power Trump has in effecting the issue in the future.
6. Uses examples from when Texas previously defunded Planned Parenthood
6.1. Connection: These articles use Texas as an example of what can happen if Planned Parenthood is defunded. These articles are using the example to make their argument and trying to warn the national government about the effects of such action. The example shows real effects of the action and make it a strong point.
7. Text #1: "Defunding Planned Parenthood was a disaster in Texas. Congress shouldn't do it nationally.: Women Suffered after a 2011 state law."
7.1. Main Ideas: The article gives an example of when Planned Parenthood funding was cut in Texas. The author uses this example to show that the results in Texas that were harmful to the people and the policy should not be enforced nationwide. The massive reduction in led to the closing of 82 women’s healthcare offices and forced those that were still open to charge high prices for their services and for birth control. This led to more women who could not afford birth control or who had to use less advanced forms of birth control and there was therefore, more unplanned pregnancies in the state. The author argues that congress should learn from this mistake and not make it, again, nationwide.
7.2. Author: Joseph E. Potter and Kari White
7.2.1. Authors Credibility: Potter and White are research associates at the University of Texas.
7.3. Source Genre: Newspaper (The Washington Post) Analysis: Since the text is a newspaper article it gives more up to date information than the peer reviewed articles. It goes through a shorter process and less people to be approved and can be published in a day. This process allows the information to be presented to the public quickly and be current information, unlike a peer reviewed article. In addition the Washington post is a well known and usually is a credible source.
7.4. Audience: The newspaper article is intended to be read by the general public. For this reason it gives general information on the subject to inform the public about the issue and make them care about it.
7.5. Authors position/ethics: The authors are arguing that the nation should learn from Texas's mistake and not repeat it. They wants Planned Parenthood and other women's health care providers to keep their funding.
8. Text #2: "Planned Parenthood could be first casualty of Obamacare repeal efforts"
8.1. Main Ideas: Department of Health and Human Services, Rep. Tom Price, has constructed an “ACA replacement bill that prevents federal funds from going to health-care plans that cover abortions.” Snell points out that Planned Parenthood provides a wide range of services including STD screenings, birth control, mammograms, and other forms of cancer treatments. All of these services will lose funding and that will “cost the government $130 million over the next ten years” due to an increase in unplanned pregnancies and children needing medicaid coverage. By cutting Planned Parenthood’s funding, even though most voters support it’s funding, the government is singling out one service that primarily serves women, which many perceive as immoral. This article talks about many of the main points I will discuss in my paper. Specifically that planned parenthood is about woman’s health care, not abortions. The article also includes quotes that reporters gathered and shared with the public through various media sources on the issue.
8.2. Author: Kelsey Snell
8.2.1. Authors Credibility: Snell is a reporter who specializes in fiscal issues.