To be fair, he did advocate for forced sterilization of men too BUT itās much more difficult to identify men that would fit his category.
IMO, there is too much with the moral judgements in this line of thinking 
and way tooo much āstateā control in the bedroom and health.
Why pay for a smoker that got lung cancer? Or an alcoholic whoās liver needs treatment? What about a diabetic who goes off their diet and fucks around with their meds? Or the obese who canāt stop eating? Or just those that have āproblemsā due to their high junk food intake? AS doctors, the reason for the healthcare is set asideā¦ THE uterus IS a ORGAN and ethically should not be denied healthcare when the woman DECIDES.
It appears the idealism of the minute and āone-offsā solution is how so much of the BAD policies get support THAT effect society as a whole.
PAY your taxes! Then society can afford the homes for foster care or adoption (not the greatest but NO Christian pro-birth advocates adopt these kids)ā¦ afford rehab centres, afford sex education and mental health services, afford free birth control - AFFORD humane solutions and choice for ALL.
Edited to add: his focus has been on women (pregnancy 
) like I said is obvious - BUT an unstable man (hahahaha) can impregnate WAY more women but itās more shhhhhh 
and harder to detect. Libertarians go for obvious and āsimpleā.