TY - JOUR T1 - Austerity and sustainable sexual and reproductive health care JF - Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care JO - J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care SP - 232 LP - 234 DO - 10.1136/jfprhc-2015-101400 VL - 42 IS - 3 AU - Rudiger Pittrof AU - Ulrike Sauer AU - Elana Covshoff Y1 - 2016/07/01 UR - http://jfprhc.bmj.com/content/42/3/232.1.abstract N2 - English sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services are commissioned by local authority councils from their public health budget. Their allocations are predicted to shrink by up to 50% by 2017.1 To show that SRH care is good value for money it has to generate net earnings or net savings for those commissioning services. Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and NHS (National Health Service) trusts gain little from preventing uncomplicated pregnancies because they generate a net income from these pregnancies. SRH commissioners do not fund maternity care, abortion services, paediatric care or services for children and as a result do not benefit from any savings created from prevention initiatives. In order to have sustainable services we need to work with those who will have a net savings as a result of our care. New funding could come from two sources: (1) NHS or mental health trusts and (2) social services.Most SRH services in England are now also integrated with hospital-based genitourinary … ER -