North Country loses funding for teen pregnancy/ parenting program

The Watertown Daily Times is reporting that Planned Parenthood of the North Country New York recently lost $95,000 in Teenage Services Act funding from the state.  That means the program to assist pregnant and parenting teenagers has been eliminated.

The newspaper quotes Martha Stahl, vice president of external affairs at NC Planned Parenthood, as saying the cut would help the state reduce Medicaid costs.  Pregnant or parenting teenagers had to be eligible to receive Medicaid to participate in the program.

“For us, these programs were pretty self-supporting, and it was very successful, but that was the only funding to support it,” Stahl tells the Watertown Times.  “It was a Medicaid program, and we could bill Medicaid for that.”

There is no longer a specific Planned Parenthood program for pregnant and parenting teenagers in the North Country, but the newspaper reports that some participants of the Teenage Services Act program have qualified to transfer to the agency’s Community Health Worker Program.

What do you think – is it a good idea to cut money for teen pregnancy and parenting programs, to save money on Medicaid?

Tags: , ,

128 Comments on “North Country loses funding for teen pregnancy/ parenting program”

Leave a Comment
  1. john says:

    Did we amend the constitution and drop the ‘establishment clause”? Christianity has no superior or inferior standing to any other belief system or non-belief system. They are all equal. The notion that some of our founders were christians, (some were not), does not lend some biblical authority over our public policy. Actually, that’s how the founders meant for it to be. They were all too familiar with religious tyranny and theocracy. This ‘life begins at conception’ is a trojan, (har!), horse to eliminate several forms of birth control that prevent zygote implantation in the uterus … IUD, pill etc. So what’s the real agenda here?

  2. Paul says:

    Wow, are you guys still arguing about this one. Talk about a hot button topic!

  3. JDM says:

    Walker: “JDM, where, exactly, does God explain that life begins at conception?”

    I will take your question seriously, and give you my best answer:

    Psalm 139:15 David speaks of God knowing him while being formed in his mother’s womb.

    Jeremiah 1:5 God tells Jeremiah that he was known before he was conceived, and he was called while in his mother’s womb.

    Luke 1:41 the babe (John the Baptist) leaped in her womb (at the arrival of Mary)

    In the Old Testament, many references are worded, “she conceived a son”.

    Moses complained, “have I conceived all these people”?

    It is in these examples and wordings that the idea of life begins at conception is obtained.

  4. JDM says:

    Pete Klein: “I do have a problem when they want the government to enforce their religious beliefs on everyone.”

    Well, to some extent I agree. I don’t want the government telling me where and when I can use my cell phone.

    But, given the belief that I have (and others) that abortion is murder, I do want the government to not allow murder.

    PNelba: “Some people have faith that the Earth is round and that if you jump off a tall building you will fall to your death.”

    I agree with that one.

    Darwin and global warming have opposing theories that are also believable. For that matter, so does faith in God.

    Where there are multiple theories to choose from, I would say we have to choose to believe one. That would be the category for Darwin and Al Gore.

  5. Peter Hahn says:

    Chris – Planned Parenthood doesn’t do many (if any mammograms) because most of their patients are young. Mammograms aren’t really useful for women under 50. You seem to have a problem with sex.

  6. Peter Hahn says:

    and JDM – Not to get into a theological debate, but I thought the prevailing biblical concept in biblical times was that men planted their “seed” in the women. There wouldn’t be a “conception” in the modern sense.

  7. JDM says:

    Peter Hahn: “But, by extension, you shouldn’t expect others to believe the same way you do.”

    Ditto. About Darwinism.

  8. JDM says:

    Peter Hahn: “seed” (and Walker)

    Actually, the Biblical “proof” of life beginning at conception is not a single verse.

    There are three instances, that I can readily think of, where babies were identified in the womb:
    Psalm 139:12-15 (David), Jeremiah 1:4 (Jeremiah), and Luke 1:41 (John the Baptist “leaped” in his mother’s womb when Mary appeared).

    Beyond that, there are dozens of references to “she conceived a son”, or Moses got frustrated at God and said, “did I conceive all these people”?

    From those references, it is apparent that God recognized a person in the womb, and by further inference, it was at conception.

  9. JDM says:

    Probably it’s John-the-Baptist “LEPT”

  10. Peter Hahn says:

    JDM – no one is saying you have to believe in evolution or believe the earth is round or the earth goes around the sun etc.

  11. Walker says:

    JDM, it’s simply a huge leap to get from the verses you site to “life begins at conception”. Fetuses in the first few months of pregnancy simply do not “leap.” That’s known as “the quickening.”

    Wikipedia: “Usually, quickening occurs naturally at about the middle of a pregnancy. A woman pregnant for the first time (i.e. a primigravida woman) typically feels fetal movements at about 18-20 weeks, whereas a woman who has already given birth at least twice (i.e. a multipara woman) will typically feel movements around 15-17 weeks.”

    And verses saying “she conceived a son” don’t tell us anything about when the fetus _became_ a son. It became a son, as far as people of the time could tell, when it was born. Even today, even with sonograms, you don’t know whether you will have a son or a daughter until you’re well down the road.

  12. Paul says:

    Folks you have to learn to agree to disagree on this topic. It looks like most Americans think that abortions simply to terminate a pregnancy should be illegal.

    Check this out it is really amazing how split we are on this one:

  13. Walker says:

    Doesn’t it just figure that those most likely to be “pro-life” would be those past the age of conception:

    “Majorities of adults under 55 call themselves ‘pro-choice,’ while about half of those 55 and older are ‘pro-life.'”

  14. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    Chris LaRose: The American Republic was founded on our Christian religious beliefs, read up on US History.

    A lot of our Republic was based on the Iroquois Confederacy.

  15. Peter Hahn says:

    Paul – the country is split about 50:50 on the abortion question. Depends how and what you ask.

  16. JDM says:

    Walker: In the Bible, the “conceived a son part” seems to always end with it being a son. I already explained that it takes an element of faith to believe the Bible.

    It is also interesting to note that we are “conceived in sin”. That makes us sinners without having done anything. That is why redemption is by belief, not by anything we do.

  17. JDM says:

    It is also interesting to note that (according to the Bible), we are conceived in sin. Psalm 51:5

  18. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    Of course you realize that the Bible is NOT literal truth. Even Jesus told parables and a parable is NOT literal truth.

    It is a fact and if you don’t like that fact don’t get angry at me, Jesus was the one telling parables.

  19. Two Cents says:

    JDM your examples are all from second party. God did not say those things, the subjects did. Jeremiah said, David said, etc… not on of those verses or psalms said it was from God own lips.

  20. PNElba says:

    Mr. LaRose, if abortion is murder, should the woman requesting an abortion be considered a murderer?

  21. PNElba says:

    “In the Bible, the “conceived a son part” seems to always end with it being a son…..”

    I didn’t realize the bible was written in english. Was there any interpretation of the word “conceived” when translating the bible. Was the bible translated from a translation? Could there be any uncertainty in the translation or interpretation of these stories.

    Many references to the Hebrew bible have been given to show that abortion is absolutely against god’s will. It’s interesting that Jewish people don’t interpret the Hebrew bible the way that JDM does.

  22. Paul says:

    “Paul – the country is split about 50:50 on the abortion question. Depends how and what you ask.”

    Peter, not interested in arguing any of these points. I just think that some of these stats are surprising. You are right that if you use the are you “pro life” or “pro choice” question it is split down the middle.

    If accurate, this is also interesting:

    “Notably, adults 18 to 34 are neither more nor less supportive of abortion rights than those aged 35 to 54. This conforms to a recent Gallup review of abortion trends by age, which shows younger and middle-aged adults’ views converging since 2000.”

    Also, PNElba, Maybe JDM is a Jew disguised as a christian just trying to get everyone all fired up. Not sure why he would want to do it but he always seems to manage it.

  23. NLB says:

    It’s obvious that you hard headed pro-aborts are too stubborn and blind to see the truth of abortion. seriously, are you speaking from a personal experience or just hear say? have you ever witnessed an abortion? put yourself in the shoes of the baby that is being aborted. put yourself in the shoes of a woman having an abortion. then turn to your God (or your conscience) and tell him/her/or yourself that abortion is the “right” thing to do. God help you if you answer in this manner, alleluia if you don’t – you are saved, you have seen the light!! Continue on the journey toward eternity.

  24. Will Doolittle says:

    Opposing abortion is not necessarily a religious position. I oppose abortion, not out of religious belief, but out of a repugnance with abortion. The talk of religion, and even the debate over “viability” is, I think, a distraction from contemplation of the act itself, which strikes me as horrible. Defunding Planned Parenthood’s program is, however, a terrible idea and may increase abortions in the area. Pregnant and parenting teens need all the help we can give them.

  25. NLB says:

    planned parenthood has done nothing to decrease abortion numbers :(
    more funding = more abortions

  26. Walker says:

    Is NLB just JDM with a new set of initials?

    NLB, on what factual basis do you make the claim that “planned parenthood has done nothing to decrease abortion numbers”? You just go around spouting off stuff you think ought to be true?

    And yes, to answer your question, I have witnessed an abortion, and I have seen the woman upon whom it was performed positively giddy with relief that the problems of an unplanned pregnancy were behind her. It was a first-trimester abortion, meaning that the fetus was about three inches long and weighed about an ounce.

  27. Walker says:

    In a related development, the Komen Foundation is beating a hasty retreat from their decision to defund Planned Parenthood, though many former donors are saying it’s too little, too late. It has not escaped attention that they did not back down until their revenues were threatened, and even after, it is not clear that they will restore funding.

    The following link is interesting, especially the comments:

  28. Paul says:

    NLB, I am curious how someone like you sees the so called “morning after pill” (Plan B). Putting myself “in the shoes” of someone doing that does that, what do you think? It still probably fits your definition of an abortion? How do you fell about the blockage of conception as in “the pill”, a condom, or abstinence? Do you see that as “aborting” the possibility of conception?

  29. NLB says:

    PP Year Report Gov Fund. Abortions Blood $ from Abort
    1999 187mil 183,000
    2005 273mil 265,000
    2008-09 363.2mil 332,278 $162,580,040
    2010 487.4mil 329,445 $164,722,500

    Here you go Walker, from PP Yearly Reports
    Some women don’t do well after an abortion, if that is the case there is healing at

  30. PNElba says:

    Looks like the Koman Foundation has come to its senses and reversed itself. Funding for PP is back on.

  31. mervel says:

    I can’t speak for the other pro-life individuals. But to answer your question Paul anything that would kill a human life would be a problem. So once conception happens a unique human being is at that point born it is a living being that is totally unique in all of existence. My problem with the willful killing of that human being is that it creates an attitude that is cavalier toward life in a society. It becomes easier then to talk about killing the very sick, the very disabled, after all they would be better of right? It becomes easier to kill in general including in these insane wars. To be pro-life means to support all life and oppose all things that diminish the sanctity of life, including war and the death penalty and torture. It also means supporting families so that they are not put in these situations all children should be loved and supported.

    So things like the morning after pill if they kill that unique human life form would be abortion and I would oppose them.

  32. mervel says:

    My opinion though from a legal, strategic standpoint is that the train has left the station. We can’t control any drugs in this country we certainly would not be able to control this drug. The same goes for the procedure itself, it is simply too popular at this point to stop, it is now a normal part of our culture and society. If you outlawed it, it would just be one more giant underground business that we would have to try and police. Better to change people’s attitudes and hearts.

  33. Walker says:

    NLB, figures on the numbers of abortions performed have absolutely nothing to do with your claim that “planned parenthood has done nothing to decrease abortion numbers.”

    If Planned Parenthood hadn’t made birth control available at low cost to people who couldn’t otherwise afford it, there would have been many more unplanned pregnancies, many of which would have resulted in abortions. They provided 2.2 million people with contraception. If they weren’t there, how many women do you suppose would have died in botched abortion attempts? Would the total number of abortions go down or up if Planned Parenthood wasn’t there?

  34. Mervel says:

    The number of abortions has not gone down since Planned Parenthood came into existence, it has in fact exploded.

    I don’t think Planned Parenthood caused the increases we have seen but they don’t stop abortions, they simply go with the flow.

  35. JDM says:

    Walker: “Is NLB just JDM with a new set of initials?”

    Still here, Walker. Just more us, apparently.

  36. Paul says:

    Mervel, thanks for the reply. Each sperm and egg produced during spermatogenisis and oogenisis is a genetically unique (totally unique in your words). There is then another level of genetic change that occurs during fertilization (conception being the other term).

  37. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    I’m so bored with the “abortion debate” as it stands in this country. I don’t believe that the religious right wants abortion ended because they feel it is a way of maintaining control over political power.

    Increasing the availability of good quality sex education, availability of contraception, good education in general, and higher rates of pay have been shown -conclusively- to reduce the number of abortions. But the religious right doesn’t want to endorse the types of strategies that actually work to reduce the numbers of unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

    There is no debate in this country about abortion — nobody wants to get abortions. The debate is on the need for abortions and the religious right are the primary reason that many abortions happen because they wont support the proven effective means of reducing abortion.

  38. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    I also find it really telling that virtually any debate about abortion is always conducted primarily by men.

  39. NLB says:

    @ knucklehead – why do you assume everyone here are men and why does that matter? “religious right” by that term I think you really mean to say those that respect all life. and yes the respect of life’s main goal is to end all abortion. no abortion is ever on abortion is needed, it causes more harm to all involved than PP will ever tell you, contraception does not decrease abortion just look at the stats from PP and their BC handouts compared to abortion rates.
    @ walker – there are more than just one person that honors the sanctity of life in this world :) botched abortions are still happening! women are still dying from abortion!
    @mervel – yes we need to change peoples hearts the abortion industry is not regulated haven’t you read the Gosnell Horrors in PA? they should be policed

    nobody has said anything about the 54million babies that have been slaughtered. they have no voice, they have no choice.

    do we keep giving more and more of our hard earned $$ to PP and other slaughter houses to kill off our young? or do we stand up and say ENOUGH!! These women and children need us to be there for them, to help them, and love them – at least offer and pray for them. what a way to exit this world before they even get a chance to see it. abortion hurts women forever……….

  40. JDM says:


    Well said. Many on this group have convinced themselves to turn aside their attention.

    “It’s not a baby”
    “It’s not that common”
    “It’s a woman’s right”
    “It’s for political power”?

    Planned Parenthood, statistically-speaking, does 1,000 abortions per day, every day, 365 days a year. That represents about 1/3 of the abortions in the US alone, let alone world-wide.

    If we could turn off the meat grinding Planned Parenthood operation, it would be at least be a dent in the statistics.

    We have aborted a good portion of our current population. Just to bring it home, our colleges nationwide should have another 4,000,000 students this year. They do not. We aborted them. i.e. we killed them.

    Abortion needs to be stopped. Stop the killing.

    We can deal with birth control, adoption, counseling, etc. These are smoke screen issues to mask the main issue – abortion is killing someone.

    If we get the murder out of the picture, we can discuss the other issues as we should. One of these things is not like the other, however.

  41. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    NLB: “@ knucklehead – why do you assume everyone here are men and why does that matter? “religious right” by that term I think you really mean to say those that respect all life. and yes the respect of life’s main goal is to end all abortion. no abortion is ever on abortion is needed, it causes more harm to all involved than PP will ever tell you, contraception does not decrease abortion just look at the stats from PP and their BC handouts compared to abortion rates”

    1. obviously you don’t read carefully because I said “primarily by men”.
    2. “respect all life”? As if!
    3. some abortions are needed to save the life of the mother. See #2 above.
    4. contraception reduces unwanted pregnancies. I’m not going to get into a battle of statistics because some people mis-use statistics to try to prove a point instead of using them to shed real light on a subject. Then other people use those bad statistics endlessly making more people more ignorant about the subject in question. Use your brain. If the world has 10 times more people than in 1930 then there will likely be many more abortions than in 1930. If the government legalizes abortion and requires medical reporting then there will be many more verified abortions than when abortion was illegal.

    If you respect all life then you should be grateful that women who do get abortions are able to get medical care in a safe environment where they are far less likely to die from a botched abortion.

  42. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    I guess I have to reiterate my point.

    Abortion opponents should be working hard to make abortions safe, legal, and rare instead of trying to make them illegal.

    What happens if you make abortion illegal and on a par with murder? Are you going to pass the death penalty on women who get abortions? Respect life.

  43. oa says:

    “Abortion opponents should be working hard to make abortions safe, legal, and rare instead of trying to make them illegal”
    Knuck, you’re assuming abortion opponents care only, or even mostly, about abortion. They also care deeply about women having sex, and women having a say in their own health-care decisions, and the abortion foes are mostly against those things, too; hence the expansion of the war on abortion (and I do mean war–they shoot doctors, and some of these people with respect for all life defend that) into a war on contraception, sex education, and now, with the Komen flap, apparently a war on breast exams.

  44. Mervel says:

    Making abortion illegal is not going to end abortion, just like making divorce illegal won’t stop marriages from breaking up or making pot illegal has any impact on people smoking pot.

    I think for those of us who are pro-life the path is going to be to continually point out that you are killing a human being when you have an abortion, that many abortions do involve inflicting pain on an unborn child, simply showing the stages of child development in the womb has an impact on stopping people from killing that child. Also like I said earlier we have to support families in real ways, health insurance, childcare, nutrition, education and so forth.

    I don’t know if focusing on changing the laws is the right tactic to really support life.

    @paul, the genetic change that happens at conception creates a unique human life form that begins the life stages of a human being, a sperm cell never grow into a human being.

    I just think when we start to say hey at this stage its okay to get rid of the human being and at this stage it is not we lose a little of ourselves.

  45. PNElba says:

    …..”religious right” by that term I think you really mean to say those that respect all life.”

    Not even close. By that term I think of those that want to force their religious views on everyone. I think of those that want to tell women that they must be the ones to die if it is necessary to save a fetus. I think of those that say if you got raped…too bad. The child must be born. I think of those who desperately want to save unborn babies, but who then support policies that work to undermine helping that baby become a productive citizen. I think of those who claim that some god speaks to them. I think of those who in my understanding of Christianity are not very Christian.

  46. Mervel says:

    Both sides paint caricatures of each other.

  47. Walker says:

    “…those that respect all life.” You know, there really _are_ people who “respect all life.” They are buddhists, who not only don’t eat meat, they try very hard not to kill insects.

    If saving an embryo or a fetus condemns both the mother and the child to lives of misery, how is that “respecting life”?

  48. Mervel says:

    Walker I am confused, why would that condemn them to a life of misery? If we can make the choice for the human embryo that it will indeed have a miserable life and thus should be killed now to spare it that miserable life, who else do we get to decide for?

  49. knuckleheadedliberal says:

    Moderator! Point of order!

    What is the longest thread of comments for any In Box post? I believe we are approaching or have perhaps set a record.

  50. PNElba says:

    It’s an insult to assume that those who support a woman’s right to choose what to do with her own body do not respect life. This is a really difficult issue and unfortunately god doesn’t whisper in my ear and tell me what is right concerning this issue.

Leave a Reply