SAFA remarks to City Council regarding the use of taxpayer funds to promote IUDs to Teen Girls

September 21, 2017 SAFAFamily

Good afternoon. I am Patrick Von Dohlen, I represent San Antonio Family Association.

The use of Medicaid dollars in Item 51 is a bad idea. It is not a compassionate idea for teen girls.

This is an attempt to re-instate the program that was terminated this past February as it used very dangerous chemicals via drugs called Depo Provera and Nexplanon.

Where is the authentic compassion for the teen girls?

Why is this program being reintroduced now with the promotion of IUDs?

This is the same San Antonio Metro Health District that has a former abortion doctor on staff who almost became the Medical Director of SAMHD. Chichi Junda Woo used to be the Medical Director for Planned Parenthood South Texas. This is an abortion model not a compassionate model.

Scientific evidence exposes harmful side effects.

Physical side effects:

1. Young female’s body parts are more constricted and many times the IUD when inserted can harm and even puncture uterine wall causing immediate infection risks or worse and potentially permanent infertility. Many of the mechanical devices will be forced out of the girls body not staying in for the stated time as the human body naturally attempts to dispel foreign objects, as happens with pacemakers and hip replacements.

2. If the Device does remain in, there is a long lasting opening to the vagina due to the string that remains hanging out of the female, similar to a tampon string.

3. Evidence shows that STD cases grow with the use of chemical and mechanical contraception devices.

Emotional & mental side effects

– this proposal is already planning for their detriment and resulting mental care!

– the use of IUDs and Depo Provera and Nexplanon cause depression

– if girl sexually abused then she is USED

– this causes depression, emotional and mental stress and confusion which increases teen suicide

Where is the COMPASSION for the teen girl in that?

Parental notification required:

What are the exceptions to this? How do you know it’s not an uncle or older boyfriend or pimp?

Council has spent a great deal of time promoting compassion, and removing historical monuments.

If you choose to vote for this bad ordinance, you’ll be voting for:

•the physical harm to teen girls and potential permanent infertility

•the planned emotional harm to teen girls

•the approval of sexual abuse of teen girls without consequence for the perpetrators

•the discrimination of minorities, as most who qualify for Medicaid will be demographic minorities, many who might be here as Dreamers or undocumented. Will you support the Dreamers but not their offspring or future offspring?

If you choose to go forward with the sterilization of predominantly minority teenage girls you will be erecting a new monument of slavery to Margaret Sanger, who professed the elimination of the “unwanteds,” in every teen girl who will be mechanically sterilized.

Do what the Mayor said just earlier today at about 10:20 am during discussion and just before the Child Safe vote:

“It’s vitally important to protect the most vulnerable children.”

How is it COMPASSIONATE AND INCLUSIVE to physically and emotionally harm female teens, many of whom might be Dreamers, and their babies?

Learn the meaning of the words “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” Mt 9:13

Don’t sacrifice minority teen girls bodies for the benefit of sexual predators. Have mercy on them and protect them by listening to the Mayor’s own comments from this morning: “We must protect the most vulnerable children.”

I agree, Mr. Mayor, and I encourage each of you to carry it out by voting NO / AGAINST this Item 51a.

I appreciate your time and your vote against this proposal that will harm teen girls bodies and eliminate their offspring.

There is NO COMPASSION in this proposal only convenience for public officials, sexual predators and money for the harmful contraception manufacturer and the SAMHD, utHSC and University Hospital.