Oh, free checkups for the IUD, free removal when the time is up (five or ten years depending on model) or at any earlier time at the patient's request, and of course not required of anyone; but it should be offered to anyone having an abortion, of any income level, for any reason. (I'd say they should be offered free to all women who want them, but a lot of doctors don't like giving them to women who haven't given birth, and in any case there's no STD protection as there is with condoms, which makes distribution of condoms vastly more important in most cases.) It's non-hormonal, non-carcinogenic, non-reactive to medication, minimally invasive, indetectable other than through medical examination, not dependent on memory, not dependent on the other person, protective against pregnancy from rape or in the case of condom failure, and extremely effective without decreasing later ability to become pregnant. Depo-Provera has lots of problems and vasectomies are a) surgical b) difficult to reverse and c) impossible to provide to women. *) I wouldn't advocate either of those or tubal ligation in this sort of situation.
I'm fine with the state subsidizing costs for the birth and care of the infant if the parents are poor. I think the state has a legitimate interest in the health of its citizens. Regardless, though, that sort of medical care is generally cheaper than raising a child. Perhaps subsidy during that tricky window when the X% chance of viability is high enough to call for attempt at live birth but low enough that the child will need extensive medical support, reducing as X gets higher?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Blow-by-blow reply
Date: 2005-11-07 04:35 pm (UTC)I'm fine with the state subsidizing costs for the birth and care of the infant if the parents are poor. I think the state has a legitimate interest in the health of its citizens. Regardless, though, that sort of medical care is generally cheaper than raising a child. Perhaps subsidy during that tricky window when the X% chance of viability is high enough to call for attempt at live birth but low enough that the child will need extensive medical support, reducing as X gets higher?