(This is the ninth in a series of AI-generated analyses of the right-wing manifesto “Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership, the Conservative Promise.“ Some chapters are reviewed out of order.)

Project 2025’s vision for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under a future Republican administration would likely have a significant impact on healthcare access, abortion rights, and family planning options in the United States. It could potentially lead to a more market-driven healthcare system, reduced access to abortion, and increased emphasis on traditional family structures. It could also limit access to healthcare for some populations, restrict parental rights in certain cases, and raise privacy concerns.

The chapter emphasizes the importance of married, two-parent families and criticizes policies promoting single motherhood or LBGTQ families. It advocates for messaging that prioritizes fathers’ engagement in child-rearing. This could potentially impact social safety net programs and messaging around family planning.

The author argues that the current HHS prioritizes “social engineering” and gender identity politics over the well-being of Americans. Here’s a breakdown of the proposed changes and their potential impact:

Restrictions on Abortion Access

• The text implies a shift in funding away from organizations like Planned Parenthood, which offer abortion services. This would reduce access to abortion, particularly for low-income women.
• The proposal seeks more comprehensive abortion data collection, potentially with the aim of stigmatizing abortion or using it to target abortion providers.
• The document advocates for reversing the approval of mifepristone (abortion pill) and reinstating stricter regulations, significantly limiting access to medication abortion.

Impact on Children

• The focus on traditional families might marginalize children from non-traditional family structures.
• Restricting abortion access could lead to an increase in unsafe abortions and potentially more children entering the foster care system.
• Weakened regulations on pharmaceutical companies and medical devices could expose children to potentially unsafe drugs or treatments.
• Prioritizing  parental rights in decisions about a child’s upbringing could potentially limit children’s access to certain healthcare services or information.
• May limit access to reproductive healthcare and sex education.
• Could potentially strain foster care systems and increase adoption wait times.

Reduced Government Intervention

• Advocates for less federal oversight of healthcare providers.
• Aims to decrease regulations on drug development and testing.
• Might lead to increased costs and potential safety concerns in the healthcare system.
• Could limit access to affordable healthcare for low-income families.

Parental Control

• Grants parents more control over children’s healthcare decisions.
• Opposes vaccine mandates and school mask requirements.
• May limit access to preventative healthcare measures and vaccinations for children.

Focus on Fetal Personhood

• The document emphasizes the concept of “fetal personhood” from conception, potentially laying the groundwork for legal restrictions on abortion as murder.
• The proposal seeks to protect healthcare workers who refuse to perform abortions based on religious beliefs, potentially creating barriers for women seeking care.
• Research funding could be redirected away from studies on abortion safety and efficacy, hindering evidence-based practices.

Overall Impact

These proposals, if implemented, would likely lead to:

• Reduced access to safe and legal abortion: Limiting funding and imposing stricter regulations would make abortion more difficult to obtain.
• Increased risk for women: Restricted access to safe abortions could lead to a rise in unsafe procedures performed by unqualified providers.
• Erosion of bodily autonomy: The emphasis on fetal personhood could restrict women’s right to make choices about their bodies and reproductive health.

In conclusion, Project 2025’s vision for HHS would significantly restrict abortion access and prioritize a specific ideological view of family and healthcare. The proposals raise concerns about women’s health and bodily autonomy, while also impacting public health efforts. It could also exacerbate health disparities among children from different socioeconomic backgrounds.

Scary Quotes

“The Secretary should ensure that all HHS programs and activities are rooted in a deep respect for innocent human life from day one until natural death: Abortion and euthanasia are not health care.” (Even if the mother’s health is at risk.)

“Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on ‘LGBTQ+ equity,’ subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families.”

About the Author

Roger Severino, a former Trump administration official at HHS, is a long-time anti-abortion crusader who also has called for removing vaccine mandates in the Head Start program and allowing for more accommodations for individuals, including doctors, who cannot take or administer vaccines because of religious beliefs.

Read the Entire Series

https://thewritecoach.blog/reject-project-2025/

Read the Entire Document Here (If You Dare)

2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf