family planning

i'm starting with a link to a n article from the san francisco chronicle http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/24/MN9416HD33.DTL

and also this http://momstinfoilhat.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/692/ and this http://momstinfoilhat.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/reply-turned-post-ive-heard-this-song-before/
from moms tinfoil hat

i'm not sure why the big whigs think not covering maternity and family planning services will save money?

re family planning, how many unintended pregnancies are the result of a lack of access to affordable family planning?

according to the guttmacher institute's report Abortion in Women's Lives ( http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/2006/05/04/AiWL.pdf ) "Most U.S. couples want only two children. To achieve this goal, the typical woman spends roughly five years pregnant, postpartum or trying to become pregnant and three decades trying to avoid unintended pregnancy.1 "

thats 30 years of using some form of bc...and i only know of one methods thats free and charting your cycles and remaining abstinent during your fertile times is just not workable for all women all the time...

i just read thAT for every dollar spent on family planning we save 4$ on later use of social services....can't find anything to back that up just yet but it sounds good

as an aspiring midwife i don't always agree with acog but heres something they got right and this is from last year

http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr05-08-07-2.cfm

i think i'm going to have to expand and to tackle maternity coverage later as it is getting late....