IBJNews

Officials urge Indiana Planned Parenthood to split up

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana officials contend the state's Planned Parenthood chapter could end a fierce legal dispute over abortion funding by simply separating its abortion business from other services.

But advocates for the organization view the idea as a red herring pushed by critics seeking to entirely defund the country's largest abortion provider. Their skepticism is fueled by experiences from Planned Parenthood chapters in two other states where non-abortion services were targeted even after such a split.

"They want to put providers of safe abortion care out of business, and they will do so however they can," said Ken Lembrecht, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of North Texas.

The two sides will make arguments Thursday to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, and it's unlikely the legal skirmish will end there.

Indiana is one of the major fronts in a nationwide battle between social conservatives and Planned Parenthood. Gov. Mitch Daniels signed a law in May that made Indiana the first state to deny the organization Medicaid funds for general health services including cancer screenings.

State officials argued federal law bars Medicaid from covering abortions in most circumstances and that Planned Parenthood indirectly funds the procedures by mixing the Medicaid money with other revenue. Indiana's chapter won a temporary injunction in June to continue receiving the funds while the debate progresses through the court system.

Planned Parenthood performs more than 5,500 abortions annually in Indiana.

State attorneys suggested in a brief filed in August that Planned Parenthood should just separate its services to ensure no public money goes toward abortion. While officials with the state group say they're open to that, the outcomes of similar battles in Missouri and Texas give them pause.

Texas set up a Medicaid waiver program in 2005 to provide family planning services for low-income women but banned abortion providers from receiving any of the funds. In response, that state's Planned Parenthood formed a separate abortion affiliate.

But Roger Evans, senior director for public policy for the national organization, said legislators later changed the rules to disqualify funding for any provider even affiliated with an abortion provider. The goal, he said, wasn't to stop abortion funding but to "hobble" Planned Parenthood itself.

"They're looking for ... every little tactic they can use," Evans said.

Indiana state Sen. Scott Schneider, author of the proposal to defund Planned Parenthood, called the organization's split in Texas a "superficial" one. He said the group simply "moved the abortions to the second floor."

Missouri's Planned Parenthood chapter split up in 2001 following a court ruling. Three years later, the Legislature largely eliminated state family planning funding, leaving thousands of low-income women who didn't qualify for Medicaid without any preventive health care, said Paula Gianino, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri.

Betty Cockrum, Planned Parenthood of Indiana's president and CEO, said she fears lawmakers eventually will decide to target the organization's non-abortion services, even if the law only aims for the abortion money.

"If that doesn't satisfy the Legislature, my question is, what's the shelf life? The Legislature might change the rules in 2013 or so," she said.

Indiana Family and Social Services Administration spokesman Neal Moore said the agency, which administers Medicaid in the state, could not comment about the proposal to split up services because of the pending litigation.

Planned Parenthood officials in Missouri and Texas say it's inefficient and unnecessary to separate the services, which requires also separating such things as board meetings and bank accounts.

"It's incredibly cumbersome," Gianino said.

She said sophisticated accounting programs are available that can track the separate funding without physically splitting them up. Schneider said the issue isn't accounting practices but whether taxpayer is used to subsidize the termination of pregnancies.

Officials with Planned Parenthood argue women who seek elective abortions aren't the ones who get hurt in the funding disputes because federal funds generally can't be used to pay for abortions anyway except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

Rather, Evans said, the services most affected are women's health procedures such as pap tests, cancer screening and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.

The clash in Indiana mirrors similar debates over Planned Parenthood in Congress and numerous states.

An effort to defund Planned Parenthood was at the heart of debate over a possible federal government shutdown earlier this year, and a Republican-led House panel last month asked the organization to produce records proving it doesn't spend public money on elective abortions. A nationwide coalition of anti-abortion groups said last week it is preparing to push legislation in all 50 states requiring that pregnant women see and hear the fetal heartbeat before having an abortion.

Officials in Texas this year slashed the family planning budget by two-thirds, from $111.5 million to $37.9 million for the two-year budget period, said Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of State Health Services. Planned Parenthood of Austin spokeswoman Sarah Wheat said that the family planning cuts left about 300,000 Texas women without health care.

In Indiana, Cockrum says the Medicaid ban stands to affect around 9,300 women who rely on Planned Parenthood for their health care.

Schneider says those women can simply go elsewhere.

"We've identified numerous outlets that provide women's health services that do not provide abortions, so this is not about women's health. This is about taxpayers funding abortion providers," he said.

Cockrum, however, says many of those other providers don't offer all the services that Planned Parenthood provides.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Uhh, not so fast
    He does if he's paying for it, Sweetheart.
  • Enough already
    PP can perform as many abortions as it wants. Nothing has changed, except that now the people getting those abortions have to pay for them. The obvious takeaway is that this is simply about PP continuing to receive tax dollars. If PP was really committed to women and women's "health," they'd do what every other non-profit has done, which is find a way to survive without tax dollars. This morally bankrupt organization whines and moans that it's all so unfair. That's wrong. What is unfair is using the law to take money from people who find the process of killing innocent life out of convenience and then calling it something else. Abortion is not a choice. The choice was made when the clothes came off.
  • no right
    TG, you have no right whatsoever to dictate what medical procedures may or may not be performed. It is a decision to be made by the woman and those whose counsel she seeks.
    • Over 5,500?
      "Planned Parenthood performs more than 5,500 abortions annually in Indiana."
      Over 5500 lives denied choice... in the name of "choice". The more obstacles to my tax dollars funding that tragedy, the better.
    • Stop skirting the law
      Like it or not, abortion is a legal medical procedure that physicians have the right to perform and patients have the right to receive. I'm fairly sure Sen. Schneider can grasp that reality, so I wish he'd move on.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

    2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

    3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

    4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

    5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

    ADVERTISEMENT