Author: has written 5300 posts for this blog.

Jill began blogging for Feministe in 2005. She has since written as a weekly columnist for the Guardian newspaper and in April 2014 she was appointed as senior political writer for Cosmopolitan magazine.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

15 Responses

  1. bellereve
    bellereve January 31, 2011 at 6:17 pm |

    Question: Does PP have a sliding scale for women who cannot afford their services?

  2. Alyson
    Alyson January 31, 2011 at 6:34 pm |

    Bellereve: It depends on the clinic, and the service itself. From what I’m familiar with, sliding fee scales are often not applicable for abortions because federal money can’t pay for them. I don’t know how this works in states where state funds can be used for abortion. Often clinics will work with abortion funds (and Planned Parenthood has one that they work with) to considerably lower the price; but it’s still hundreds of dollars. I’m guessing the woman quoted here was a few more weeks along than she thought she was.
    However…it’s not stated in here that this woman went to PP, she could have been at an independent clinic, with a different sort of funding system.

  3. RD
    RD January 31, 2011 at 7:11 pm |

    PP has sliding scale for gynos, testing, etc. Idk about abortions.

  4. anonymoat
    anonymoat January 31, 2011 at 9:47 pm |

    I never thought it was possible for a country to actually regress in social values.

    An interesting look at this shocking prop here:

    Personally, I am not surprised to see who is behind it.

  5. Tony
    Tony January 31, 2011 at 10:03 pm |

    From a bit of research, I’ve heard first trimester abortions run anywhere from $350 to $600. That’s still a lot less than the cost of having a baby. But it’s true that this could lead to more later term abortions as lower income women wait longer to save the money for an abortion.

  6. micheyd
    micheyd January 31, 2011 at 10:24 pm |

    I volunteer at a PP in NY state, and it seems like there is a sliding scale available for all services – however, it hardly makes abortions cheap for women paying out of pocket, and those who don’t make the sliding scale cut but don’t have insurance get hit really hard.

  7. Azalea
    Azalea January 31, 2011 at 11:57 pm |

    Thats so counterproductive. Isn’t it cheaper to pay for an abortion than to pay for prenatal visits? Because medicaid DOES pay for prenatal visits, labor and delivery and the child that is born afterwards.

    Republicans complain about the “wasteful” spending of democrats and yet they would rather force poor women to carry to term (and pay for every visit and complication along the way) than to pay for an abortion?

    How does this make any sense ot them? And just what do they hope to accomplish by removing the narrow scope of saving the patient’s life or health?

  8. PrettyAmiable
    PrettyAmiable February 1, 2011 at 12:07 am |

    Azalea, Republicans don’t mind spending money on people. You know, like fetuses. I’m pretty sure not one of them thinks a woman or trans dude is a person.

  9. Astrid
    Astrid February 1, 2011 at 7:32 am |

    @ Azalea: I agree. It is much cheaper to abort than to have prenatal care, which of course doesn’t mean the reverse (paying for abortions but not prenatal care) should happen. Besides, Medicaid only pays the healthcare costs of a child, not all the added costs of raising that child.

  10. William
    William February 1, 2011 at 11:58 am |

    How does this make any sense ot them? And just what do they hope to accomplish by removing the narrow scope of saving the patient’s life or health?


    Regardless of their stated motives, regardless of the political rhetoric, regardless of whatever long-dead prophet they quote, the forced birth movement always comes down to dominance. They want to control women, they want to put them in their place, they want to take power away from women. Everything else is just a complicated patchwork of set dressing, bullshit, and political maneuvering. We can’t ever let ourselves forget that the only thing stopping these kinds of people from behaving in the exact same manner as the Taliban is that they don’t think they can get away with it. The only difference between Rep. Smith and a clinic bomber is the latter’s willingness to go to jail.

  11. Stacey Burns
    Stacey Burns February 1, 2011 at 2:26 pm |

    Thanks so much for this post, Jill! The National Network of Abortion Funds hears from women every single day who are desperate, in situations like Leila’s. If these legislators could spend just an hour on one of our fund hotlines listening to women describe their own stories, we think they might have a change of heart. We urge everyone opposed to the dangerous HR3 bill to take action by contacting their Representatives, here:

  12. micheyd
    micheyd February 2, 2011 at 11:14 pm |

    My bad….I checked in on the rates and there is no sliding scale for abortion services where I volunteer. It’s possible that providers in other states have that, though.

  13. Brenda
    Brenda February 3, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

    The saddest thing about this is, I’d tell the girl the best thing she could do for her son in intensive care is release custody of him to the State. It’s what I’d still tell her to do. It’s not going to get any better. There’s no help for any of us.

  14. Abby
    Abby February 3, 2011 at 10:12 pm |
  15. Fighting with your body
    Fighting with your body February 16, 2011 at 11:26 am |

    […] rape” language was taken out due to some public ridicule by our man Jon Stewart, but HR3 would still codify the Hyde Amendment and fuck over subsidized clinics. And HR358 would allow pregnant women to die if an emergency abortion would harm the fetus.  […]

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.