Pro-abortion Guttmacher's 'policy solutions' prove they see parents as an enemy

The Guttmacher Institute, a former "special affiliate" and research arm of Planned Parenthood, has a new policy strategy which calls upon state and federal lawmakers to target parental rights for the purpose of expanding abortion access for minors as well as expanding abortion funding.

This new report should erase any doubt that Guttmacher is an anti-life group which sees parents of children as a major obstacle to its pro-abortion agenda.

Key Takeaways:

• The Guttmacher Institute's latest policy strategy pushes state and federal lawmakers to expand abortion access, taking aim at laws that require parental consent or notification before a minor can get an abortion.

• Guttmacher is also seeking to circumvent parents by eliminating laws that penalize non-parents from taking minors out of state for abortions without parental knowledge.

• The group is also demanding that Planned Parenthood have its federal Medicaid dollars restored and wants Medicaid dollars to be able to fund abortions without restriction (undoing Hyde Amendment federal protections).

The Details:

Guttmacher's 'Policy Solutions' Wish List

Guttmacher's November 2025 report, "Act on the Evidence: Policy Solutions to Protect and Advance Abortion and Contraception Access in the United States," includes a wish list of policies it would like to see enacted:

• Removing the names of abortion providers from prescription labels.

• Prohibitions on the collection and sharing of "consumers’ sensitive health information," or patient information from law enforcement investigations.

• More funding (which they refer to as "investment") for abortion and abortion providers at the state and federal level.

• Additional pro-abortion ballot initiatives and shield laws.

• Removing "mandated abortion reporting requirements and protecting patient location data" (despite the frequent failure of Planned Parenthood and abortion facilities to protect client privacy).

• Expand the pool of abortion providers to "advance practice clinicians, such as nurse practitioners, physician assistants and other medical professionals."

• Mandate coverage of abortion in health insurance plans, including public insurance (require that private insurers cover abortion).

• Assert a right to travel for those seeking abortion, including for minors and those who transport them out of state.

• Federal and state legislation that "provides investments in provider training, community support organizations, and wrap-around services... for in-state and out-of-state patients."

• Pass the pro-abortion EACH Act and enact the Real Education and Access for Healthy Youth Act.

• Oppose restrictions on Title X funds that would limit abortion providers from receiving these taxpayer dollars.

Eliminating parental involvement to expedite minors' abortions

Guttmacher's report claimed that "Young People Face Unique Challenges in Accessing Abortion," adding:

Prior to Dobbs, policies such as parental involvement laws hindered access or placed abortion care out of reach for many young people. Now, anti-abortion policymakers have intensified their attacks on young people’s access to abortion services while drawing new lines of attack on the friends, families, and community support networks that help them obtain care...

... Among adolescents 17 and younger, the majority (53%) lived in a state with a parental involvement law. When asked about the states where they received an abortion, 43% reported obtaining an abortion in a state with a parental involvement law. These data points indicate that some minors travelled out of state for care...

...54% of adolescents reported paying out of pocket for their abortion, at an average cost of $499, and reported that they had to delay bill payments or sell something to cover the cost of an abortion.

The pro-abortion group called it "imperative" for lawmakers to "advance policies that respect the reproductive choices of young people" decrying the fact that 38 states require parental involvement in a minor’s decision to have an abortion."

The pro-abortion group plainly stated that it believes children have "reproductive autonomy" that supersedes any parental authority:

"Such [parental involvement] laws should be repealed and states should take proactive steps to support young people’s reproductive autonomy."

Guttmacher also demanded that "policymakers should repeal medically unnecessary state laws such as forced waiting periods, biased counseling, ultrasound requirements, and in-person dispensing requirements for medication abortion."

On one hand, abortion apologists claim abortion should be treated as if it is simply "health care," yet on the other hand, they have carved out special exceptions for this particular form of "health care" ("reproductive health care") without any parental involvement.

Protecting abortion travel and 'trafficking' of minors

Guttmacher called on policy makers to open the doors for abortion trafficking by protecting non-parental figures who take a minor across state lines for an abortion (emphases added):

Policymakers should affirm every young person’s right to abortion care, as well as the rights of the people and community support networks that assist them in accessing care, and including their rights to share information and travel across state lines and localities.

In 2023, Idaho passed the nation’s first abortion support ban, and in 2025, six other states introduced eight bills following this model. These bills target people who help minors travel to access legal abortion care without parental knowledge or consent, and must be defeated.

According to Guttmacher, "In 2024, approximately 154,900 people crossed state lines for an abortion, representing 15% of all abortions provided in states without total bans. This is close to double the number who did so before the end of Roe (81,100 in 2020)." They also noted that in the first half of 2025 "Guttmacher data show this interstate travel declined by 8% during this same period."

While the organization did not break down those numbers by age, it claimed that 16% of minors reported "having to make travel arrangements" to obtain abortions.

Guttmacher wrote:

Protect the right to travel. Congress should reassert the constitutional right to travel to another state for the purposes of obtaining legal abortion care in that state.

Strengthen and expand shield law protections. Many states have already enacted some level of shield law protections ... This typically includes protections for people traveling from out of state for abortion care and those helping them access these services. Where states have enacted these laws, policymakers should continue to strengthen and expand these protections, extending shield law protection to the telehealth provision of medication abortion to residents of ban states. Importantly, states should plan to revisit and reassess their shield laws as new avenues of attack emerge.

Live Action News has previously documented multiple instances in which abortion funding organizations entice teens to travel out of state, even offering to take them for abortions; abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, which has repeatedly failed to report child sexual abuse, have also been complicit.

One such case was recently exposed by the pro-life group Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, whose South Carolina affiliate recently released undercover footage allegedly exposing a "multi-state abortion fund, the Palmetto State Abortion Fund, (PSAF) secretly transporting a minor for an abortion, two hours away, despite the parent’s clear disapproval," according to the group's press release.

Protecting Planned Parenthood

Guttmacher was founded and named after Alan F. Guttmacher, a former Planned Parenthood vice president and eugenics proponent who helped to promote the decriminalization of abortion. As the former "special affiliate" of Planned Parenthood, the groups have exchanged staff and funding for decades.

So it is no surprise that Guttmacher defends the top abortion corporation's funding:

Policies that threaten to close clinics, such as the federal denial of Planned Parenthood Medicaid reimbursement, reduce access to care because other providers frequently do not have the capacity to serve a higher volume of patients.

... Policymakers must resist all efforts to curtail Medicaid recipients’ ability to use their coverage at the reproductive health care provider of their choice, including Planned Parenthood clinics. They should also reinforce Medicaid policies stipulating that recipients can see their provider of choice and, where restrictions exist, states should provide funding that support clinics’ ability to serve all patients, as lawmakers did in Colorado.

Guttmacher then called out so-called "political attacks" against groups like Planned Parenthood for removal of federal Title X dollars, despite their repeated failure to follow the law to obtain and retain taxpayer monies.

Funding abortion 

"The Hyde amendment bans public insurance programs like Medicaid from covering abortion care with federal funds, except in the instances of rape, incest and life endangerment," Guttmacher correctly pointed out. Yet, the organization wants all abortions paid for by taxpayers, failing to note that data proves when abortions are taxpayer-funded, abortions increase.

All health plans and programs, including publicly funded health programs like Medicaid, must not only cover person-centered counseling on comprehensive sexual and reproductive health care, but must also cover all contraceptive methods and abortion care.

Guttmacher also reported:

• 71% of patients who received care in states where Medicaid can be used to cover the costs of abortion paid $0 out of pocket for their pills or procedure in comparison with only 10% of all patients in states where Medicaid is prohibited from covering abortion.

• In states where Medicaid does not provide coverage beyond Hyde exceptions, two-thirds of respondents had to raise money for abortion care, for example, often delaying bills or expenses.

• In the same study, 31–33% of respondents indicated that they had to pay for travel, regardless of whether their states’ Medicaid funds covered or did not cover abortion care.

In addition to tax funding, Guttmacher wants to force insurance companies to cover the costs of abortion, noting that "states like Colorado, Illinois, and Delaware have taken recent steps to require that private insurers cover abortion."

The Bottom Line:

Despite these horrific proposals, there was some good news hidden in Guttmacher's report:

According to our analysis based on regular surveys of abortion providers, between 2020 and March 2024, the number of brick-and-mortar clinics offering abortion care in the United States declined by 5%, a net loss of 42 clinics.

In March 2024, there were no clinics providing abortion care in the 14 states with total abortion bans in effect at that time.

Real help for men and women to keep and parent their children is needed, and any "policy solution" which increases and funds the killing of human beings and those who provide it is an egregious wrong, not a solution.