Some are going to see this title and say "that is wild hyperbole". But, now that we have years of empirical statistical data to review, the point is not too far off. Over the last seven years, the Infant Mortality Rate has dropped significantly, a true positive for the US.. and something we should all be proud of.
The states with the steepest declines in infant deaths — Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and South Carolina — have long been plagued with some of the nation’s highest infant mortality rates, Dr. MacDorman added. In all four states the rate dropped by more than 20 percent from 2005 to 2010, the latest year for which state data are available. The District of Columbia, which has expanded a home-visit program for poor pregnant women and stepped up other efforts to keep mothers and their babies healthy, saw the biggest drop: from 14.05 deaths per 1,000 births in 2005 to 7.86 in 2010.This, in the end, is a real accomplishment - wanted children who are properly cared for and a decreased infant mortality rate. A plus for all of us. But state after state, Republicans are apparently telling us that they would prefer the OLD infant mortality rate, the one that happens with diminished pre-natal care.
According to the “End of Session” report from the Florida House of Representatives released this week, Florida’s Healthy Start Coalitions lost $5.2 million dollars in state funding this year. Local Healthy Start coalitions provide high-quality prenatal care services for at-risk mothers and health care services for children in their communities.This kind of pattern thinking gives us these results: with a lower standard of care, you end up with an increased rate of infant mortality, children who die at birth or in the first twelve months of life. Those in poverty who proceed with having a child without proper prenatal care have an increased risk of birth defects and illness, which proper prenatal care can help resolve. Finally, women with low access to prenatal care may feel pushed to have an abortion, because they have neither the money or resources to provide for a proper pregnancy. So, I ask Republicans: Why have you decided that having babies (those from birth to 12 months) die at a higher rate is good? Because good prenatal and post-birth care, which you are cutting does exactly that. Last I checked, that was called infanticide. And in the grand scheme of things, it makes me sick.
Sometimes, we overlook the trees and all we see is the forest. A successful society works to help make sure that the people are well cared for, avoid illness, and have access to good medicine and good advice. But that's not always the case, at least not to Republicans.
States like Nebraska, Kansas, Indiana have all made moves to cut prenatal care, and at the same time, they move to cut funding to planned parenthood, of course. In their mind, it means fewer abortions. In reality, it means far more unwanted pregnancies, and a raise in rates of infant mortality.
One in 10 women said that they had switched to a less expensive provider of contraceptive services. This increased demand for lower-cost services was mirrored in the survey responses from family planning providers. Two-thirds of the family planning centers surveyed noted an increase in the number of clients seeking services between the first quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 (see chart, page 10). Importantly, the vast majority of providers surveyed said they had seen an increase in the number of clients who are poor or low income and, therefore, eligible for free or reduced-fee care from providers receiving any subsidy from the federal Title X program.As women have less and less access to effective birthcontrol, the rate of potential unwanted pregnancy goes up.
More than half the providers reported significant service delivery challenges in meeting clients' needs. Most often, they reported staff layoffs or a hiring freeze during 2009. Many also said that they had been forced to reduce the number of contraceptive methods they are able to offer; more expensive methods such as the IUD, the implant, the patch and some brand-name oral contraceptives were the most likely to be cut. One in four providers said that waiting times had increased, typically doubling from less than a week to about two weeks.
The republicans counter this claim with: "Then don't have sex". My response: OK, let us see how long you men who pass these laws can go without sex. We'll have a Jerry Seinfield like competition and check it out.
The sad fact is, this move to cut access to early care and family planning doesn't cut abortion as much as it increases infant mortality - and which is more negative to you?
In general, Owens said, many pregnant women don't realize the importance of getting their own medical problems treated.http://www.cnn.com/...
"We know that the way we get the best pregnancy is to have a healthy mom before mom and baby are together," she said.
Birth defects are the leading cause of infant death in the United States. Not all are preventable, but a mother can reduce risk by keeping her own health under control by eliminating smoking, drinking and illegal drugs.
The same is true for premature births, another leading cause of infant deaths in the United States. The March of Dimes recently released its Premature Birth Report Card and gave failing grades to Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana. Mississippi has the largest premature birth rate based on the 2011 national statistics used in the report.
With conservative states leading the way in rates of birth defects and premature births. Not all birth defects can be prevented, but many, say the March of Dimes as well as the CDC, can be prevented through good prenatal care, proper nutrition, access to routine checkups.. which includes health of the mother, blood pressure control, etc. These are common things for those with insurance and care, but not for the poor.
So, let's be blunt.. the decrease in prenatal care means a rise in infant mortality and an increase in children born with preventable birth defects because of lack of care.
The March of Dimes speaks to exactly how effective good pre-natal care is.
The medical costs of care for children with disabilities resulting from birth defects have been estimated to exceed $1.4 billion annually.That's OK, though, because Republicans will want to fund support for all the children of disabilities born because of bad prenatal care, and they will provide support for women who lose their child in the first year, right?
While some types of birth defects have decreased, mainly through preventive methods, many have increased. According to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study of 38 types of birth defects occurring over the period 1979-89, 27 had increased, including several cardiac defects, chromosomal defects such as trisomy 18, and fetal alcohol syndrome; nine had remained the same; and only two had decreased.
Don't worry, Republican governors have got that.
2. A program to help adults with disabilities live independently faces an enrollment freeze in the new budget, which will leave nearly 17,000 men and women throughout the state without vital resources over the next two years. Family Care helps provide a wide range of services such as in-home care, supported living communities, meal delivery, and job training to help keep more than 31,000 people integrated with their communities; waiting lists for private resources like housing can be well over a decade. Cutting off enrollment in Family Care is a message from Scott Walker to men and women already disproportionately affected by poverty and discrimination that in his eyes they’re less than human.http://www.alternet.org/...
So, with more unwanted pregnancies, a higher infant mortality, and an increase in preventable birth defects, I want to know: when did Republicans become the party that likes any of these things? Because rooting for increases in infant mortality and birth defects is so abhorrent to me, I cannot fathom the logic.
Sorry Republicans. I prefer babies who breath and live healthy, long lives. That's why I favor prenatal care support. Please, advocate for me that you want more children to die after birth, as long as they aren't aborted. Because it would be an honest assessment of how this will turn out.