Cognitive Dissonance

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather boa!" - Allen Ginsberg

Posts tagged Planned Parenthood

786 notes

Planned Parenthoods Rescued By Obama Administration With Large Title X Grants

Ten Republican-controlled state legislatures have voted to defund Planned Parenthood since the 2010 midterm elections, but the clinics affected by the cuts will not have to shut their doors any time soon. The Obama administration so far has awarded hefty new federal family planning grants to Planned Parenthood clinics in three states that have cut the providers’ funding: New Jersey, Tennessee and North Carolina.

While Obama supports Planned Parenthood, the direct Title X grants are not exactly unusual: HHS has contracted directly with Planned Parenthood providers for years, including under former Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. But the Planned Parenthood clinics that are receiving new federal grants this year are applying for those grants for the first time after defunding in their states created a need for federal money.

Paige Johnson, a spokesperson for the Planned Parenthood clinic in Durham, said that clinic has never appealed to HHS for Title X grants because it was always able to partner with the state. But after the state stopped contracting with Planned Parenthood, the clinic made the case to HHS that it is the primary provider of family planning to low-income women in the area. Under federal law, HHS is required to award grant funds in a manner that expands women’s access to care in the most cost-effective way possible in areas of the greatest need.

Trust me, they mad.

A huge thank you to the Obama administration for putting women’s health above the GOP’s hissy fits.

Filed under Planned Parenthood Funding Title X Obama Barack Obama politics reproductive health health care women's rights reproductive rights

96 notes

On Contraception, Republicans, and Federal Funding

Rebloggable by request:

I’m visiting my dad and he’s insisting Obama starting the federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Help!

 Anonymous

Meg at Cognitive Dissonance:

Nope. Thank this guy:

That would be Richard Milhous Nixon, the 37th President of the United States. Planned Parenthood’s federal funding was started by Nixon under Title X. Here’s his statement on it:

"I called for a national commitment to provide adequate family planning services within the next 5 years to all those who want them but cannot afford them. It was clear that the domestic family planning services supported by the Federal Government were not adequate to provide information and services to all who want them on a voluntary basis.

To implement this national commitment, I asked for expanded research in contraceptive development and the behavioral sciences, reorganization of family planning service activities within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and legislation which would help the Department to implement this important program by providing broader and more precise legislative authority and a clearer source of financial support. The National Center for Family Planning Services was established in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare shortly after my message.

The bill before me today, the “Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970,” completes the legislation I requested in my message on population. This measure provides for expanded research, training of manpower, and increased family planning services. In addition, it provides for the development of family planning and population growth information and education.

It is noteworthy that this landmark legislation on family planning and population has had strong bipartisan support.”

See, back in the day, the Republican Party was much less against contraception and family planning than they are now. Let me repeat that: Republicans in 1970 were more supportive of welfare, contraception, and access to both than they are now. Tell your dad “citation needed, bro.”

Bonus points! Here’s why public funding of contraception is important from the nonpartisan Guttmacher Institute:

• Publicly funded family planning services help women to avoid pregnancies they do not want and to plan pregnancies they do. In 2006, these services helped women avoid 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 860,000 unintended births and 810,000 abortions.

• Contraceptive services provided at publicly funded clinics helped prevent 1.48 million of these unintended pregnancies; the remaining 450,000 unintended pregnancies were prevented among Medicaid enrollees who received publicly funded contraceptive services from private physicians.

• Without publicly funded family planning services, the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions occurring in the United States would be nearly two-thirds higher among women overall and among teens; the number of unintended pregnancies among poor women would nearly double.

• Contraceptive services provided at Title X-supported centers helped prevent 973,000 unintended pregnancies in 2008, which would likely have resulted in 432,600 unintended births and 406,200 abortions.

• The services provided at publicly funded clinics saved the federal and state governments an estimated $5.1 billion in 2008; services provided at Title X–supported clinics accounted for $3.4 billion of that total.

• In other words, nationally, every $1.00 invested in helping women avoid pregnancies they did not want to have saved $3.74 in Medicaid expenditures that otherwise would have been needed.

Success!

Tell your dad to email me. He sounds interesting.

Cheers,

Meg

Filed under Family Planning Contraception birth control gender politics Richard Nixon Anonymous ask box Obama Barack Obama Republicans GOP Title X sex reproductive health reproductive rights Planned Parenthood

180 notes


I got this.
Meet Abby Johnson. She thinks women have too many rights. Seriously. From toomanyrights.org:

Today, a hundred years later, women’s rights have come very far, but there is one of these rights that many Americans would question… The right to abortion is considered a “reproductive right” by many. They say it is the right of a woman to exercise control over her body, but is that what the issue is really about?

Ahem… 
Yes. That’s what it really is about. I invite Ms. Johnson or her supporters to read The Fetal Focus Fallacy. An excerpt:

Although fetuses cannot enjoy legal personhood, anti-choicers argue that fetuses do have a right to life that outweighs the right of the woman to control her fertility and her life. But many anti-choicers support exceptions to a ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, a threat to the woman’s life, or even health. This clearly indicates that they believe the right to life of a fetus is negotiable, certainly not absolute or paramount. By compromising their “right to life” definition in order to accommodate a woman’s rights, they inadvertently acknowledge that women’s rights are more important than the right to life of fetuses.
Even if a fetus can be said to have a right to life, this does not include the right to use the body of another human being. For example, the state cannot force people to donate organs or blood, even to save someone’s life. We are not obligated by law to risk our lives jumping into a river to save a drowning victim, noble as that might be. Therefore, even if a fetus has a right to life, a pregnant woman is not required to save it by loaning out her body for nine months against her will. In response, anti-choicers say that being pregnant is not the same as being a Good Samaritan, because the woman chose to have sex, voluntarily accepting the risk of pregnancy. This argument is sexist and puritanical because it punishes women, not men, for their sexual behavior. Moreover, sex is not a contract for pregnancy - people have a constitutional right to non-procreative sex because of legalized birth control, which implicitly provides the right to have sex without reproducing.

In conclusion, no. A woman does not have too many rights, Ms. Johnson — particularly with folks like yourself running around and attempting to limit them.

I got this.

Meet Abby Johnson. She thinks women have too many rights. Seriously. From toomanyrights.org:

Today, a hundred years later, women’s rights have come very far, but there is one of these rights that many Americans would question… The right to abortion is considered a “reproductive right” by many. They say it is the right of a woman to exercise control over her body, but is that what the issue is really about?

Ahem… 

Yes. That’s what it really is about. I invite Ms. Johnson or her supporters to read The Fetal Focus Fallacy. An excerpt:

Although fetuses cannot enjoy legal personhood, anti-choicers argue that fetuses do have a right to life that outweighs the right of the woman to control her fertility and her life. But many anti-choicers support exceptions to a ban on abortion in cases of rape, incest, a threat to the woman’s life, or even health. This clearly indicates that they believe the right to life of a fetus is negotiable, certainly not absolute or paramount. By compromising their “right to life” definition in order to accommodate a woman’s rights, they inadvertently acknowledge that women’s rights are more important than the right to life of fetuses.

Even if a fetus can be said to have a right to life, this does not include the right to use the body of another human being. For example, the state cannot force people to donate organs or blood, even to save someone’s life. We are not obligated by law to risk our lives jumping into a river to save a drowning victim, noble as that might be. Therefore, even if a fetus has a right to life, a pregnant woman is not required to save it by loaning out her body for nine months against her will. In response, anti-choicers say that being pregnant is not the same as being a Good Samaritan, because the woman chose to have sex, voluntarily accepting the risk of pregnancy. This argument is sexist and puritanical because it punishes women, not men, for their sexual behavior. Moreover, sex is not a contract for pregnancy - people have a constitutional right to non-procreative sex because of legalized birth control, which implicitly provides the right to have sex without reproducing.

In conclusion, no. A woman does not have too many rights, Ms. Johnson — particularly with folks like yourself running around and attempting to limit them.

Filed under Abby Johnson too many rights anti-choice abortion reproductive rights politics seriously conservative Planned Parenthood I can't even

23 notes

Condom use 101: Basic errors are common, study finds

Miss this? Pretty sure it’s what the anon in the previous post was discussing:

Led by Stephanie Sanders of The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction at Indiana University, the researchers pulled together 16 years of research on condom errors and failures going back to 1995. They found 50 studies from 14 countries, though western nations such as the United States and the United Kingdom predominated. The studies involved diverse groups of participants, from married individuals to sex workers to college students; as such, there were a range of condom use-error rates.

An analysis of all 50 studies found a laundry list of reported errors in condom use. For example, between 17 percent and 51.1 percent of people queried in the studies said they’d put on a condom partway through intercourse — negating any disease-controlling benefits, since fluids are exchanged throughout intercourse not just during ejaculation. Other studies found that between 1.5 percent and 24.8 percent of sexual experiences involved putting a condom on too late in the process of intercourse.

Here’s a helpful video:

If you’re not sure what method of birth control is right for you, here’s some helpful resources from Planned Parenthood compiled into one huge chart. See these short and sweet instructions from hndwrttn as well.

Yet another reason defunding Planned Parenthood is a bad idea. Oh, and yes, Gov. Nikki Haley. Though you claim women don’t care about birth control because the economy, etc. is more important than reproductive health care, women DO care about birth control. Everyone should — at the very least, care enough to know you and your partner are using your method correctly if either you wishes to not be pregnant and STD-free. An unplanned pregnancy, otherwise known as a case of the babies, can be a huge disruption to your personal economy. Same with an STD.

So pass this info on. You never know who might need it.

Filed under Birth control condom news Planned Parenthood how to Nikki Haley politics family planning reproductive rights reproductive health

120 notes

Texas state senator's office firebombed

"Pro-life, these people aren’t pro-life, they’re killing doctors, what kind of pro-life is that? What, they’ll do everything they can do save a fetus, but if it grows up to be a doctor they just might have to kill it?" — George Carlin

Or, apparently, a female Texas State Senator who fought against the defunding of Planned Parenthood. Luckily, no one was killed, but this is horrifying. From Fox 4 News:

The Fort Worth Fire Department is investigating an arson attack at State Sen. Wendy Davis’ legislative office.

Fire officials said just after 4 p.m. on Tuesday someone threw two Molotov cocktails into the third-floor office on West 7th Street. Two of Davis’ staff members were there at the time. They used a fire extinguisher to put out the waist-high flames. No one was hurt.

According to UPI:

Davis, a Democrat, played a high-profile role last week in arguing against plans by Texas state officials to cut funding for Planned Parenthood, saying such a move could deprive 130,000 Texas women of healthcare services including cancer screening and contraception.

This is not fucking funny. This past August, a Planned Parenthood clinic in Texas was firebombed. The McKinney, Texas clinic is less than one hour from Fort Worth. In January of this year, Donny Mower received five years in prison for firebombing a California Planned Parenthood Clinic and vandalizing a mosque in late 2010.

From Texas Right to Life:

Click on a dot, get all the info about the clinic, or “abortion mills” as they call them. The McKinney Clinic is still listed as open.

Texas Right to Life on Sen. Davis:

While the Pro-Life super majority has been a blessing, there were a select few who would stop at nothing to squelch the advances for Life. Most notably, Representative Jessica Farrar and Senator Wendy Davis were determined to stop all Pro-Life efforts.

Writer Robert Gieb at Catholic Lane calls Sen. Davis “a political handmaiden of the abortion industry which makes millions of dollars from killing weak and vulnerable human beings.” Gieb also writes:

"The state senator who represents the district in which I reside, Wendy Davis, is a most fervent supporter of killing the innocent unborn, and has been well compensated by the abortion industry, having received thousands of dollars in campaign donations from the pro abortion group called Annie’s List, and both money and substantial in kind political advertising and telephone work from Planned Parenthood."

When in the hell are we going to call these firebombings terrorism? When are we going to examine the heated rhetoric involved in calling a state senator a child murderer?

The entrance to the McKinney PP Clinic:

Sen. Davis’ door:

This is domestic terrorism. Period. It’s often religiously motivated. Bet you won’t hear Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney condemn it on the campaign trail — it’s just a feeling I have.

Sen. Davis’ staffers are very fortunate, and I hope the arsonist — the attempted murderer of innocent, already-born people — is brought to justice swiftly.

(Source: cognitivedissonance)

Filed under abortion terrorism domestic terrorism Texas politics news anti-choice pro-life extremism Wendy Davis Sen. Wendy Davis Democrat planned parenthood arson crime

135 notes

Planned Parenthood, we’re going to get rid of that.

Mitt Romney, discussing his deficit reduction plan this week in Kirkwood, Missouri.

Romney’s spent a lot of time talking about math. So let’s do some math!

Planned Parenthood received $363.2 million in federal/state dollars for FY 2009. The U.S. budget deficit for FY 2009 was $1.4 trillion. So what portion of the federal deficit is Planned Parenthood’s budget?

Well, it’s 2.5943x10-4  or .025943% of the federal deficit in FY 2009. Clearly, that is a massive contribution to our deficit and must be eliminated. 

So never mind the human consequences of the decision — like Romneybot™ is concerned with human consequences. The math simply makes this suggestion ridiculous, particularly when examining defense spending and Romney’s war boner for Iran.

(Source: cognitivedissonance)

Filed under Planned Parenthood Mitt Romney Math politics GOP Conservative reproductive rights

6,797 notes


literallyunbelievable:
How exactly did you get elected?

A few thoughts. Jezebel writer Erin Gloria Ryan says:

Even if Fleming didn’t know The Onion is satire, he should have known that something was amiss when he actually read the article— if he actually read the article. Among the piece’s claims: Planned Parenthood’s new slogan is “No Life is Sacred,” the megamall style facility had a lazy river ride for patients, and, most improbably and hilarious, that Planned Parenthood somehow in magical abortion fairyland found a money tree that grew them enough money to give them $8 billion (about 8 times their entire annual budget) to spend on one megabortionmall.

Ryan misses one big point. She says if he read the article, it would be obvious satire. I argue that’s a maybe - this article seems to jive with the worst stereotypical vision of Planned Parenthood conservatives can imagine. They portray people seeking abortions as irresponsible, drug-consuming, heartless trollops. This article underscores that stereotype. Why not believe it’s true if it confirms what you believe?

literallyunbelievable:

How exactly did you get elected?

A few thoughts. Jezebel writer Erin Gloria Ryan says:

Even if Fleming didn’t know The Onion is satire, he should have known that something was amiss when he actually read the article— if he actually read the article. Among the piece’s claims: Planned Parenthood’s new slogan is “No Life is Sacred,” the megamall style facility had a lazy river ride for patients, and, most improbably and hilarious, that Planned Parenthood somehow in magical abortion fairyland found a money tree that grew them enough money to give them $8 billion (about 8 times their entire annual budget) to spend on one megabortionmall.

Ryan misses one big point. She says if he read the article, it would be obvious satire. I argue that’s a maybe - this article seems to jive with the worst stereotypical vision of Planned Parenthood conservatives can imagine. They portray people seeking abortions as irresponsible, drug-consuming, heartless trollops. This article underscores that stereotype. Why not believe it’s true if it confirms what you believe?

Filed under Planned Parenthood The Onion Satire John Fleming politics pro-choice anti-choice abortion reproductive rights

50 notes

Best Tweet of the night, courtesy of @neverthegroom
His whole feed is just bizarre. He hearts Tim Tebow, but hates surfer Kelly Slater. Why? BECAUSE ALL CAPS REASONS. A sample:

I couldn’t help myself. Here’s how this played out:


Hey, at least he listened on the caps lock thing.
The best part of this mini-conversation? I was tweeting about the Superbowl and Madonna’s glittertastic, gladiator halftime show. Somehow, I imagine this guy is the real-life, more dogmatic brother of Debbie Downer from SNL. Maybe Dougie Downer? A pal of his will mention liking pink and he’ll spout off: “You guys know who else likes pink? Susan G. Komen. And they support baby-killing at Planned Parenthood!” Countering him with facts is meaningless - Dougie’s on the case! 
I love when the charmers come out of the woodwork.

Best Tweet of the night, courtesy of @neverthegroom

His whole feed is just bizarre. He hearts Tim Tebow, but hates surfer Kelly Slater. Why? BECAUSE ALL CAPS REASONS. A sample:

I couldn’t help myself. Here’s how this played out:

Hey, at least he listened on the caps lock thing.

The best part of this mini-conversation? I was tweeting about the Superbowl and Madonna’s glittertastic, gladiator halftime show. Somehow, I imagine this guy is the real-life, more dogmatic brother of Debbie Downer from SNL. Maybe Dougie Downer? A pal of his will mention liking pink and he’ll spout off: “You guys know who else likes pink? Susan G. Komen. And they support baby-killing at Planned Parenthood!” Countering him with facts is meaningless - Dougie’s on the case! 

I love when the charmers come out of the woodwork.

Filed under Planned Parenthood Twitter Troll politics Susan G. Komen lulz Christian? Religion WWJD Christian anti-choice Pro-choice Conservative Conservatives

15,479 notes

lianamaris:

Things that cannot screen for breast cancer and things that can.
And for those who are yelling about PP not doing mammograms, “screenings” are not just mammograms.  ”Screenings” are also breast exams, which are the first line of defense. Those breast exams are done every time a woman has a pelvic exam, which she needs in order to get birth control or STI testing. Get it together. Semantics do not change the facts. 

And boom goes the truth dynamite…

lianamaris:

Things that cannot screen for breast cancer and things that can.

And for those who are yelling about PP not doing mammograms, “screenings” are not just mammograms.  ”Screenings” are also breast exams, which are the first line of defense. Those breast exams are done every time a woman has a pelvic exam, which she needs in order to get birth control or STI testing. Get it together. Semantics do not change the facts. 

And boom goes the truth dynamite…

Filed under breast cancer choice education feminism lgbtq occupy the cure pink planned parenthood politics priorities susan g. komen until there's a cure women health

31 notes

Why Komen Should Think Twice

politisane:

Many of you have probably read about the Susan G. Komen Foundation cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood for breast exams and other breast health related services. Before I offer my thoughts on that issue, I know I’m likely to annoy and potentially offend some people with this post, and I do think that is unfortunate. However, I’ve been pretty close to this issue in the past and I feel that politics are in this case having a direct negative affect on the healthcare of women, so I felt like offering my opinion. I’d like to thank a blog I follow, Cognitive Dissonance, for bringing this issue up and encouraging discussion about it. Although I think most of you will discover our blogs tend to be on different sides of the political spectrum, I think her thoughts are also worth a read.

In the interest of full disclosure, let me explain my involvement on the issue from the Komen side of things. Yes, I was formerly a member of the steering committee for a regional Komen affiliate. No, that affiliate did not give any grants to Planned Parenthood offices. No, I have never worked with any Planned Parenthood office in any capacity, Komen or otherwise. No, I did not receive financial compensation for my work with that Komen affiliate. My position was purely dedicated to the regional Race for the Cure and organizing and recruiting volunteers for the event, so I don’t feel there is any conflict of interest on this issue. I do think my past work with Komen and my current status as a medical student shows my commitment to the well being and health of women, and I hope most of you will take that into account when considering my opinion.

To provide a quick summary of what happened, feel free to read this article at NPR regarding Komen’s decision to cut off grants to Planned Parenthood: http://www.npr.org/2012/01/31/146160911/susan-g-komen-halts-grants-to-planned-parenthood . Basically Komen has been providing grants to a handful of Planned Parenthood offices in low income areas of cities across the country to specifically offer breast exams and education to women in their communities for several years.   The grant funds were restricted to these purposes and monitored to ensure the grant recipients used those funds for the sole purpose of breast exams and education. I’m sure all of you know Planned Parenthood’s reputation as the nation’s largest “abortion provider” and generally speaking, that’s probably true. But my personal feelings aside on their involvement in abortions, I do realize that they are often one of the few healthcare facilities of any sort in very low income areas. Many of the women they see do not have health insurance and do not keep regular appointments with their primary care doctor, if they have a primary care doctor at all. Regional Komen affiliates started offering these grants to Planned Parenthood offices in their areas because they saw the need these women had for breast exams and recognized a lack of infrastructure in their neighborhoods to provide these services to them. They also saw the data showing these women often don’t catch their breast cancer until it is much farther along than women who get routine breast exams and as a result their outcomes were much worse. Was it an ideal partnership? No, probably not. But this partnership did allow thousands of women to get a free breast exam and learn more about performing self exams and breast cancer in general that otherwise wouldn’t have had access to these resources. The offices would be listed and publicized as offering these exams for women and word would get out to the community that a free exam was available in their neighborhood. These aren’t just women that were coming to Planned Parenthood for abortions or other reproductive health reasons (not that it should matter if it was, those women need access to breast exams too), these exams were available to everyone in the community. Komen had strict rules about how the Planned Parenthood offices promoted these exams and how they had to be independent of their other services. So why are the grants being cut off? That’s where it gets political.

The Komen national office recently adopted a new rule that they could not provide grant funding to any organization under investigation by local, state, or federal authorities. Sure, I thought, that sounds pretty reasonable: Why would Komen want to allow their funds to go to any organization that might be misusing them? It’s when you start reading the articles and looking into it further that you see this rule was adopted just around the time that Planned Parenthood was put under investigation by Representative Cliff Stearns from Florida. It could be coincidence, and the rule itself sounds logical, but you also have to think about the amount of political and religious pressure Komen has been under for the last few years to cut off funding to any Planned Parenthood offices. I know Komen is saying they’re cutting Planned Parenthood off because of the investigation (which may or may not be legitimate, I haven’t looked into it), but I find that hard to believe since they’ve also purged any mention of their involvement with Planned Parenthood and their explanation pages about the grants from their website on the same day they made the announcement. They’re not just cutting off the grants, they seem to want people to forget they ever provided the grants in the first place, and to me that sounds like they are caving to political pressures.

I dealt with my own concerns about Komen’s involvement with Planned Parenthood even before I worked with my regional affiliate, but after looking into it I decided that the grants were being used for good purposes and were in no way endorsing or supporting abortion. I think the religious organizations, some of which I generally respect, that have painted pictures of these grants as being Komen supporting abortion should be ashamed of themselves. They’ve boycotted Komen, made newsletters claiming Komen is funneling money to abortion providers (a deliberate or lazy twisting of the facts at best), and gotten thousands of pro-life people very riled up against Komen knowing those people won’t put in enough research to learn the whole truth behind the grants. They like to claim that these few regional affiliates that provided the grants (around 19 in total, it’s not as if a lot of affiliates were even providing grants to Planned Parenthood in the first place) could have given the money to other types of healthcare facilities in the low income areas of their regions to accomplish the same purpose, but I think that’s very short sighted and unrealistic. I’ve seen how Komen works when deciding who to award their grants to and there are always far more applicants than there are funds. If these affiliates were giving the grants to Planned Parenthood offices in their communities, I’m confident it is because they felt it was the only place these women would be able to get the care they needed. People need to face the facts and take a drive through the poorest parts of their community and tell me what they see. Yes, there are the occasional free clinics, but are they open every day? Do they have the necessary facilities and staff that are trained or can be trained to provide breast exams on a daily basis? Are there any churches, community centers, or other local non profits with the necessary facilities and staff? I think you’ll find the answer to all of these can be no in a lot of poor areas and a place like Planned Parenthood may simply be the only option. There are broader social concerns that this should also raise for those of us that aren’t a fan of Planned Parenthood but see the lack of other providers in these communities, but the bottom line is these grants went to a good cause administered through a politically divisive organization and the politics seem to have come crashing down on Komen in a way that forced their decision. Even the most adamant pro-life among us should take a good look at what was actually going on here and re-examine their position on Komen and these grants, because I fear they’ve cost thousands of women ready access to breast exams and I don’t see any way that is morally defensible.

As always, I’m interested to hear your opinion on these issues.

-M

This is such a great discussion over the issues surrounding the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s terrible decision to cut off funding to Planned Parenthood. As for the investigation into Planned Parenthood, it’s a more of a vendetta. When Congress was unable to defund Planned Parenthood at the federal level, they went this route instead. It nearly mirrors what happened to ACORN.

Filed under Komen Planned Parenthood Politics Cliff Stearns Susan G. Komen Abortion Breast Cancer Breast Exam Florida Grants

134 notes

Susan G. Komen on Planned Parenthood in 2011

From their March 2011 statement on Planned Parenthood, also found in a message to a questioner roughly 18 months ago:

Early screening through mammograms and education is critical to end the suffering from this disease: 98 percent of women treated for early stage breast cancer, before it spreads, are alive five years later. The widespread use of mammography and heightened public awareness of breast cancer both contribute to these favorable statistics.

And while Komen Affiliates provide funds to pay for screening, education and treatment programs in dozens of communities, in some areas, the only place that poor, uninsured or under-insured women can receive these services are through programs run by Planned Parenthood.

These facilities serve rural women, poor women, Native American women, women of color, and the un- and under-insured. As part of our financial arrangements, we monitor our grantees twice a year to be sure they are spending the money in line with our agreements, and we are assured that Planned Parenthood uses these funds only for breast health education, screening and treatment programs.

As long as there is a need for health care for these women, Komen Affiliates will continue to fund the facilities that meet that need.

The link to the release is http://ww5.komen.org/Content.aspx?id=16162. It redirects to the homepage for Susan G. Komen. Lest we think this is an archiving issue, I searched for Planned Parenthood. The site has been scrubbed of any mention of the organization:

When I clicked through those links, there’s nothing. The suggested result also redirects.

Here’s what happened when I did an advanced Google search of the site: http://ww5.komen.org/Content.aspx?id=8624&terms=Planned%20AND%20Parenthood

Note there’s nothing about Planned Parenthood on the site. 

They’ve not only cut off Planned Parenthood, they’ve chosen to forget they ever existed. Again, I donated to Planned Parenthood here. Their new VP of Public Policy, Karen Handel, vowed to end funding at Planned Parenthood when she ran for governor of Georgia. I suppose this is the next best thing. If you donate, ask the thank you card be sent here:

Karen Handel, Senior Vice President of Public Policy 
Susan G. Komen for the Cure® Advocacy Alliance 
901 E Street N.W., Suite 410 Washington, DC 20004

Or send her an email at khandel@komenadvocacy.org

I’m beyond disgusted. This is giving in to people who care more for a clump of cells than a woman’s life. In 2010, Susan G. Komen claimed they would give funds to Planned Parenthood as long as health care needs existed for poor and minority individuals in need. As far as I can tell, in 2012, those needs still exist. 

Shame on them for caving to right-wing bullies instead of caring for the health of those who need services like Planned Parenthood the most.

(Source: cognitivedissonance)

Filed under Planned Parenthood Susan G. Komen for the Cure Susan G. Komen Breast cancer politics pro-choice anti-choice disgusting funds right-wing conservative Conservatives Karen Handel gender health poverty

77 notes

Cancer charity halts grants to Planned Parenthood

sarahlee310:

This really sucks.

The nation’s leading breast-cancer charity, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, is halting its partnerships with Planned Parenthood affiliates — creating a bitter rift, linked to the abortion debate, between two iconic organizations that have assisted millions of women.

The change will mean a cutoff of hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants, mainly for breast exams.

Planned Parenthood says the move results from Komen bowing to pressure from anti-abortion activists. Komen says the key reason is that Planned Parenthood is under investigation in Congress — a probe launched by a conservative Republican who was urged to act by anti-abortion groups.

Don’t believe it? Here’s the campaign by one such group in Wyoming. This is their explanation:

While the local Susan G. Komen of Wyoming affiliate reportedly does not partner with Planned Parenthood, 25% of the funds raised by Komen’s Wyoming affiliate at CFD are sent to the national organization. And the national organization has allowed Komen affiliates in other states to give money to Planned Parenthood, ostensibly for purposes related to breast cancer. If a Komen affiliate donates to Planned Parenthood for breast health programs, however, this frees up Planned Parenthood’s unrestricted funds so that they can pay for abortion-related services. So, while a person’s money may not directly pay for abortions here in Wyoming, there is still scandal involved because he or she is at some level enabling abortion elsewhere.

This is serious bullshit. I donated to Planned Parenthood here. Their new VP of Public Policy, Karen Handel, vowed to end funding at Planned Parenthood when she ran for governor of Georgia. I suppose this is the next best thing. If you donate, ask the thank you card be sent here:

Karen Handel, Senior Vice President of Public Policy 
Susan G. Komen for the Cure® Advocacy Alliance 
901 E Street N.W., Suite 410 Washington, DC 20004

Or send her an email at khandel@komenadvocacy.org

On Planned Parenthood’s site, they have stories of women whose lives were saved by early detection at Planned Parenthood. Here’s one story:

"I almost ignored the lump. How serious could it have been? I was 27 and had no family history of any kind of cancer. Then I remembered Planned Parenthood… Since I had no income at all, and dwindling savings, this was a great option for me. I didn’t have to decide between breast care and rent… There is no doubt in my mind that Planned Parenthood saved my life." – Colleen L., Loudonville, NY

But as far as Susan G. Komen is concerned, women like Colleen should find another way to pay for life-saving detection. 

Filed under Susan G. Komen for the Cure Planned Parenthood breast cancer women health anti-choice politics pro-choice