So it turns out that giving poor women tonnes of birth control doesn’t actually make them get pregnant less often

Richard Reeves, a co-author of the study, told the Atlantic: “I think that the evidence is . . . that it’s access to effective and safe forms of contraception and abortion” that will bring down unwanted-pregnancy rates among the poor.

In fact, it’s not that hard to get contraception; and the barriers have fallen dramatically in recent years.

Condoms are readily available. And, as of two years ago, almost all insurance policies — including the ObamaCare exchanges — cover the pill at no out-of-pocket cost.

And it’s not just the financial barriers that have come down. Women no longer have to get a pelvic exam to get a prescription for the pill, either.

Yet there’s no evidence of an increase in the use of the pill since these changes were enacted.

…if we’re being honest, it’s not economics standing in the way of low-income women using the pill.

h/t Maggie’s Farm

Share
  • It will if you make your kids lesbians according to Kathleen Wynne.

    That includes the boys.

    • Clausewitz

      I’ll admit it. I’m a lesbian trapped inside a man’s body. I really like women.

  • Observer

    Where is the incentive for birth control when you get more welfare and other government handouts for every extra kid you bring into the world?

    • tom_billesley

      Kids are also a block to deportation. Female invaders arrive pregnant in countries with jus soli.

  • winniec

    Education lowers the birth rate, but not if your income is welfare. There’s no way out of it. They don’t encourage them to go to school.

  • Just a thought

    It’s their sacred constitutional right to have us pay for it for them, whether they use it or not.

  • Drunk_by_Noon

    Stop paying for the illegitimate children.
    That one thing alone will be more effective than raining condoms down upon Harlem and South Central LA.

    • Uncle_Waspy

      Exactly. The government’s incentivizing bastardy produces bastards. Who woulda thunk it? Certainly not the social engineers.

      • Justin St.Denis

        Dots that have been connected! When will someone write a peer-reviews paper about it so the “social engineers” can take their thumbs out of one another’s azzholes and suck on them instead.

  • Darryl Harb

    You always get more of what you subsidize. And when women cannot secure emotional fulfillment through marriage, they are still endowed by nature to take an emotional hostage. And Uncle Sugar will foot the bill.

  • cmh

    Never mind the single mom debate for a moment….there is a far more urgent debate that needs to be revisited in this country.
    In Canada, women with Down Syndrome are encouraged to live full, rich lives like everyone else. This means they are encouraged to enjoy sexual activity and procreation as it is their human right to do so. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has turned what was once unsanctioned immorality (procreation by retards unable to care for their offspring) into an moral act sanctioned by the State. Truthfully, todays sanctioned practice is a million times more immoral than forcing birth control pills or shots.

  • You don’t say!

    Irresponsible people don’t become responsible when someone else pays for them.