Appeals court considers whether Texas teens should be allowed contraception without parental consent under federal program

Title X Program and Texas Teens’ Access to Birth Control

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

1. Goal 3: Good Health and Well-being
2. Goal 4: Quality Education
3. Goal 5: Gender Equality
4. Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities
5. Goal 17: Partnerships for the Goals

Introduction

For almost a year, Texas teens have been shut out of a federal program that allows minors to access birth control without parental consent. On Monday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals indicated they may uphold the court ruling that stymied the program. The three-judge panel did not rule from the bench, but seemed supportive of conservative attorney Jonathan Mitchell’s case, with one judge calling the contraception program a “destruction” of parental rights.

Background on Title X Program

In 1969, President Richard Nixon, a Republican, declared that “no American woman should be denied access to family planning assistance because of her economic condition.” The next year, he signed Title X into law, creating a nationwide system of clinics dedicated to providing contraception to anyone who needed it, regardless of age, income or immigration status. Over the last 50 years, Republicans have tried to require Title X clinics get parental consent before they prescribe birth control to adolescents. But federal appeals courts have repeatedly rejected those claims, pointing to Congress’ original mandate that clinics are required only to “encourage family participation … to the extent practical.”

The Texas Lawsuit

This Texas lawsuit, originally filed in 2020, could potentially undermine a core component of the federal program. Deanda claims that this program injured him and other parents by subverting their authority and “weakening their ability to raise their children in accordance with the teachings of the Christian faith,” the original filing said. The lawsuit argued that the program guidance to “encourage family participation” in minors’ contraception decisions established a minimum level of parental involvement, and Texas’ state laws requiring parental consent should supersede.

Implications and Potential Impact

The 5th Circuit has taken a wide view of standing in recent cases, including another controversial Kacsmaryk case involving the abortion-inducing drug mifepristone, where a panel of judges agreed that doctors who opposed abortion had standing to challenge the medication’s approval. While this case has moved through the courts, Title X clinics in Texas began requiring parental permission before they provided birth control to minors. Teens already receiving birth control through a Title X clinic lost access unless they could go back and get parental permission. If the appeals court overturns Kacsmaryk’s ruling, Title X clinics in Texas are prepared to “flip the switch” and resume offering confidential contraception to teens. But if it is upheld, this case will serve as a “harbinger for things to come,” Summers said.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3.7: By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs.
• SDG 5.6: Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Program of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences.
• SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic or other status.
• SDG 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private, and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for SDG 3.7: Proportion of women of reproductive age (15-49 years) who have their need for family planning satisfied with modern methods.
• Indicator for SDG 5.6: Proportion of women aged 15-49 years who make their own informed decisions regarding sexual relations, contraceptive use, and reproductive health care.
• Indicator for SDG 10.2: Proportion of population reporting having personally felt discriminated against or harassed in the previous 12 months on the basis of a ground of discrimination prohibited under international human rights law.
• Indicator for SDG 17.17: Amount of United States dollars committed to public-private and civil society partnerships.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: texastribune.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.