Abortion Pregnancy Centers

Archived Posts from this Category

September 16, 2014

Republicans and Over-the-Counter Birth Control Pills: An Authenticity Check

Posted by Kimmie Farrell under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Clinic, Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Stigma, Abortion Violence, Abortion.com Facebook, American Women's Services, Birth Control, CPC Deception, CPC Misinformation, CPCs Criminal Activity, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCS), Liberal, Lies, morning after pill, Not Informed, Obama, Obama is Pro Choice, Politics, Pregnancy Test, Pro Life Deception, Pro Life Lies, ProLife, Republican Party, Roe V Wade, Voice of Choice, Vote, War on Birth Control | Tags: birth control, Cialis, Democrats and OTC birth control, four hour erection, OTC birth control, over the counter birth control, Republican party and women, Republicans and OTC birth control, Viagra |
[70] Comments

There has been much discussion about birth control pills being made available over-the-counter (OTC), primarily by Republicans as an “answer” to the concerns about the inclusion of contraception in the Affordable Healthcare Act (AHA) and the contention that government should not be paying for birth control. Oh, yeah…and maybe a way to score points with women voters.

OTC birth control pills have been discussed in nonpartisan forums, including by professional medical organizations that have supported conditional OTC initiatives. Democrats now respond that it is not a good idea, leading to notions that their opposition is due to Republican support. There are also claims that women’s healthcare providers, such as Planned Parenthood, have a financial interest in preventing OTC access. I always hate to see such worthy debates become so mired in political posturing. What were once valid views that could be tweaked and put into public policy are now referred to as political party or ideological positions.

At first blush, it seems reasonable. After all, Plan B emergency contraception – the morning after pill – is now available OTC without age restrictions. Recall that there was Republican opposition to Plan B, particularly whether women under age 17 should have access. President Obama and then-Secretary of Health Sebelius favored an age requirement while most Democrats wanted it available to all sexually active women who experienced failed birth control or something horrible like rape. Eventually, science won. Nonetheless, political gamesmanship governed the debate over Plan B and it now appears to be governing the debate over OTC birth control pills, but with Republicans promoting it and Democrats rejecting it. As our individual positions evolve, there are certain questions we should ask and facts we should know regardless of our political preferences.

Why did Republicans oppose OTC access for Plan B? Some believed that by making it OTC, it would affect or encourage sexuality activity among young teens. In 2004, the FDA considered the OTC application “unapprovable” for that reason. Safety did not matter, nor did the recommendations of professional medical organizations. Sexual behavior was a concern but financial behavior was not – although the high cost of a single pill, as much as $50, for emergency contraception would substantially reduce the likelihood that young teen women would even be able to“abuse” or misuse Plan B was not considered; only immoral sexual behavior was worthy of deliberation in some political circles.

Since Republicans opposed OTC Plan B based on moral and not scientific reasoning, how can they support OTC birth control pills now given that it might indicate women are, yikes, having sex? The answer here is: fill in the blank. There are some who genuinely, however foolishly, hold the belief that the government should not pay for any birth control except maybe sterilization. Many others, like Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindall, claim that it is “hogwash” that Republicans do not believe in contraception… that anyone over 18 should be able to get contraception OTC so that those individuals and businesses with a “religious objection” will not have to pay. What is noteworthy is that the intent of OTC birth control is not to help women – it is to “help” those with specific religious views.

How can Republicans who support personhood amendments and stringent anti-abortion legislation support OTC birth control? Politics, plain and simple. It is probably unwise to even remotely consider that they have a change of heart or that they have scientific awareness about how the pill functions.

tepherisdeviantart.com

Why are we not hearing from National Right to Life and morality-policing organizations, such as Focus on the Family, that adamantly opposed Plan B and frequently lied that it was an abortifacient? Another interesting question. It is arguable that as much as some Republicans claim that putting birth control pills OTC would take the politics out of contraception, such organizations are simply biding time to get through the midterm elections and get their candidates in office. Later, if birth control pills were OTC approved, then they would come out, well-organized to mislead the public ala Hobby Lobby style seeking to ban some pills because they are abortifacients, imposing age restrictions, pushing for legislation for parental and spousal consent, or prohibiting birth control from being a reimbursable expense under flexible medical spending plans offered through many employers. I am pessimistic that approving birth control pills for OTC access would ever happen without the intervention of the morality policing groups.

Why did Democrats support OTC Plan B? Unplanned pregnancy is a public health and social issue – it is a significant factor in predicting poverty for women and children. Taking birth control pills regularly was and is not an option for all women due to contraindications in health, lack of insurance coverage, affordability, and side effects. Other effective contraceptive choices, like the IUD or hormonal implants, were/are cost-prohibitive for many women while other methods are more likely to fail. Plan B offered a safe way for women to address failed contraception or unprotected intercourse and, consequently, prevent an unplanned pregnancy and birth into negative social and economic circumstances. To date, there is only evidence of Plan B helping women and no evidence of it being misused or used in place of regular contraception.

Why are Democrats opposed to OTC birth control pills? It would be disingenuous to say that Democrats are opposed only for legitimate concerns about women’s health. Of course they do not appreciate Republican support for OTC birth control! Framed correctly and without Tea Party-ish nuances, by gosh, women voters might just buy into the idea that Republicans are not out to get women! I do not expect Democrat candidates to agree, so, now that I have said it, let me identify legitimate concerns.

Requiring a prescription ensures that women receive wellness checks for health issues that can arise or become pronounced due to the pill. For younger women in particular, it also ensures screening for sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy prevention counseling. The most significant reason to oppose OTC birth control pills is economic for women. Once a drug is OTC approved, insurance will end coverage. Thus, women of means will continue to have access and even appreciate the convenience of OTC. Poor and young women will be hurt the most. The Republican argument that it will increase competition and decrease price is misleading and could prove wrong. Additionally, OTC birth control pills would not help women who benefit most from other contraceptive methods like the IUD. What about women who need the pill for medical reasons unrelated to preventing pregnancy? They may not be able to afford the up to $120 monthly tab either.

We should all favor improving and increasing access to birth control pills and other methods for women. It must be done the right way for the right reasons. Abortion is legal but not accessible to the most vulnerable women. If birth control pills are OTC approved, it does not mean they will be accessible and it could even lead to other forms of birth control no longer receiving insurance coverage. Voters concerned about women’s health and reproductive justice should think hard about Republican support for OTC birth control. Then they should contact their elected representatives about a bill to make Viagra and Cialis OTC – just to see if male legislators think men are intelligent and strong enough to assess usage and that they can safely assume the risk of, say, a four-hour erection. Only then might we learn the authenticity of Republican concern for women’s health and that their support for OTC birth control pills is not judging the sexual behavior of women in some way.

August 10, 2014

Pro-Choice: Actions Count More than Words

Posted by Kimmie Farrell under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Centers, Abortion Clinic, Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rights, Abortion.com Facebook, Birth Control, Catholic, Christian Terrorism, Church, CPC Deception, CPC Misinformation, CPCs Criminal Activity, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCS), Planned Parenthood, Politics, Pro Life Deception, Pro Life Lies, ProLife, Roe V Wade, Voice of Choice, Vote, War on Birth Control
[93] Comments

In a recent blog, Pat Richards wrote about the term, “pro-choice,” agreeing with others that it is out of date. After seeing that last week’s listserves, blogs, and news forums I subscribe to had discussed the use of the pro-choice label for those who want to preserve abortion rights – actually, all reproductive freedoms – I decided to jump into the healthy discussion with a few thoughts of my own.

A New York Times article (7/28/14) titled, “Advocates Shun ‘Pro-Choice’ to Expand Message,” is quoted frequently. Planned Parenthood representatives were “shunning” the continued use of the pro-choice label out of a desire to more accurately reflect that “women’s health,” and not just abortion, are under attack. A January, 2013 article in Buzzfeed summarized polling data collected in 2012 that served as the impetus for Planned Parenthood to begin moving away from the pro-choice label. Questioning if the move would really help the reproductive rights movement as a whole, The Atlantic also published, “The End of Pro-Choice: Will ‘No Labels’ Really Help the Abortion Debate?” All articles noted that Planned Parenthood does not have a new label of preference – without a replacement or multi-organizational agreement, it is highly unlikely that all organizations will opt to avoid or stop using “pro-choice.” It would be a logistical challenge for organizations like NARAL Pro-Choice America and, really, whatever one thinks of the term, it is not leaving the American political vernacular anytime soon.

As a leader in providing quality, comprehensive, and affordable healthcare to women and a political force for the same, Planned Parenthood strives to effectively communicate with those it serves – medically and politically. Thus, it is not surprising that Planned Parenthood leadership began espousing a move away from the pro-choice label towards a greater emphasis on individual situations. An individual situation is what first put abortion on the minds of many average Americans who otherwise might not have had a position. In 1962, Arizona resident Sherri Finkbine sought an abortion after learning that the thalidomide she took for morning sickness caused severe and fatal deformities to babies. She ended up getting the abortion in Sweden after significant and costly publicity. A Gallup Poll at the time reported that most Americans supported her decision and during the following years, the majority of men and women believed abortion was a personal decision between women and their physicians. Sherri Finkbine’s situation is one of millions of individual situations involving reproductive decision-making that must rely on the freedoms advocated by the pro-choice movement. Good for Planned Parenthood for embarking upon that message. As a former clinic director, I know in real terms that no two abortion patients can be framed in the same box. Ever.

After the Finkbine publicity, “abortion” became acceptable, so much so that activists used “pro-abortion” when discussing legislation to legalize it. According to a 1990 William Saffire column, “pro-choice” was first used in the context of abortion in a 1975 Wall Street Journal article by political writer Alan L. Otten; he used “right-to-life” for those opposed to abortion. “Pro-life” was used primarily in the context of anti-war commentary. In 1976, the New York Times used it to describe plans for anti- abortion-related activities led by pastors. No one likes to be “anti” anything; it makes sense that “pro-life” met pastoral, political, and marketing goals just as “pro-choice” did for abortion rights at the time. Language always changes as the need arises whether political, logical, or definitional.

“Pro-choice” may seem outdated or confused. Some vibrant discussion has transpired in the comment sections of articles and blogs, as well as on sites like the Abortion.com Facebook page, in which there seems to be a general thought that, yes, the term/label may be confusing or meaningless to younger people, but what is needed is more aggressive education about what choice really does mean. Some believe that the pro-choice movement has behaved too rationally as the anti-choice movement bullied politicians so successfully that they instilled fear in them. In other words, all that “pro-life” is about is the fetus, not the woman or her family, and not about life once born. There is also a lot of agreement with something Pat Richards mentioned in his blog – “abortion” (A B O R T I O N) needs to be mentioned unapologetically, without shame and as a legitimate, viable facet of reproductive healthcare.

While many may think of the past 40 years as the most active for the pro-choice movement, the fight for healthcare, and especially to access birth control and safe abortion, has been fought by women of generations long gone. The Comstock Act of 1873 banned the possession and/or distribution of goods or mere information about abortion and contraception. “Therapeutic abortion boards” were established at hospitals in the 1950s for the purpose of approving abortions on a case-by-case basis. The formation of the Jane Collective in Chicago in 1969 was to help women access abortion. Yes, women have always had to fight to get – and keep – their reproductive freedoms. Along the way, the language has changed, and it will again. Young women in particular must join the fight for reproductive freedom before it is too late. The erosion of those freedoms over the past several years should have prompted at least a broad, multi-organizational discussion about how to improve pro-choice messaging long ago.

Anti-abortion advocates and organizations are also writing or blogging about the pro-choice label discussion with spinful abandon. It is probably nice for them to get their minds off of GOP talking points about rape or the ouster of the Georgia affiliate of the National Right to Life for being so “extreme” that it excluded abortion for rape and incest (politically inefficient perhaps?). On the other hand, as we know too well, we must not let their spin become the message about this discussion. Honest people who operate with facts they are not. Pro-choice, pro-abortion, pro-women’s health, pro-individual freedom – ultimately, actions count more than words.

July 31, 2011

Thanks, but…

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Information, Abortion lies, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, CPC Deception, CPC Misinformation, CPCs Criminal Activity, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCS), FACE law, Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances, Life Dynamics' Lies, Pro Life Deception, Pro Life Lies | Tags: CPC Deception, Crisis pregnancy center, Crisis Pregnancy Center Deception |
[281] Comments

Crisis Pregnancy Center Deception, Lies, and Misinformation

For the last few days, we’ve been talking a lot about Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPC).

If you are pro-life, these CPCs are establishments that seek to offer pregnant women (or non pregnant women, for that matter) information about their options. The staff people at these centers sit back and wait for the women to come in, they then sit them down in, in a non-judgmental environment, tell them all about adoption, childbirth and abortion. Yes, their bottom line is that they are against abortion but they really just want to make sure that woman is educated and knows what resources are available to her should she decide to give birth.

If you are pro-choice, these centers lure women into their facility under false pretenses, pretend that they are a medical office by offering ultrasounds and fill the women’s heads with lies about how the perils, both emotional and physical, of this very easy procedure.

Coincidentally, in the wake of our discussions, legislation has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and in the Senate called “Stop Deceptive Advertising in Women’s Service’s Act.” In their press release, the authors of the bills brought attention to the bill’s clever acronym: SDAWS.

Just kinda rolls off the tip of your tongue, doesn’t it?

If the bill became law, the Federal Trade Commission would be required to issues rules declaring that it is an “unfair or deceptive act” for a CPC to advertise that they are “a provider of abortion services.” The pro-choice groups are understandably elated and energized. One leader applauded the initiative and said “we should all agree that a woman should not be misled or manipulated when she’s facing an unintended pregnancy.” The troops are gearing up to storm the Congress to get this important legislation passed.

Crisis Pregnancy Center Deception, Lies, and Misinformation

My initial reaction is that this is an incredible waste of time.

Now, I admit that I have not done a full-fledged review of every CPC in the country, but I would bet that house that hardly any of them actually advertise that they “provide abortion services.” I mean, c’mon, even the sleaziest CPC staff person would never, with a straight face, say that. And if anyone can show me differently, I totally welcome the evidence and will offer a mea culpa.

Sure, many of them, if not most, say that they provide “abortion information,” but, technically, that is true. They do offer “information” on abortion, albeit in many cases it is the wrong information. But it is “information” nonetheless.

So, to me, the big question is: why are these pro-choice Members of Congress and the pro-choice groups spending time and resources on trying to pass a bill that – in the unlikely event that it becomes law – will have practically NO impact? And, for argument’s sake, let’s say the FTC does find a totally whacky CPC director who says in their Yellow Page ad that they provide abortion services. The FTC will theoretically bring some kind of action against them and chances are that that CPC will just agree to not say it in the future. And if they refuse to change their ways, maybe they’ll be shut down. Well, that leaves only THOUSANDS of more CPCs to go after! Way to go folks!

I certainly appreciate the energy of the authors of these bills and I am sure they will now get a nice donation from the pro-choice political action committees because they have shown they are pro-choice “leaders.” Meanwhile, they’ve issued their press releases and are getting some attention on pro-choice blogs, websites, etc.

But, in the long run, ain’t nothing gonna change.

And around and around we go….

It Sounds a Little Hypocritical to Me… (abortion.ws)
These Pictures Speak a Thousand Words (abortion.ws)
The Problem With The Abortion Debate (outofthegdwaye.wordpress.com)
Pro-choice activists rally for abortion providers to keep counselling role (guardian.co.uk)
Making Money From Abortion (abortion.ws)

May 11, 2011

Are We Still Fighting the Abortion “War?”

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctor Murder, Abortion Doctors that Have Lost Their Medical License, Abortion Documentary, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rates, Supreme Court, Terrorism, Vicki Saporta, Vote | Tags: abortion clinics pill, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence, birth control, Dr. George Tiller, history, Late Abortion, reproductive rights, Roe V Wade, The Wichita Divide, Vote |
[36] Comments

The Wichita Divide

Hyperbole.

I always liked that word, although it was years before I understood its meaning. And, of course, like most Americans I always mispronounced it by saying “Hyper Bowl.”

Speaking of…yesterday, a friend of mine told me about yet another book on abortion called “The Wichita Divide: The Murder of Dr. George Tiller and the Battle over Abortion” by one Stephen Singular. I will admit right up front that I have not read the book in its entirety and probably never will. Immersed in the issue for years, I never read any of the books about abortion except – to be honest – to go to the index to see if I was mentioned.

So, I may be totally misrepresenting Mr. Singular’s thesis but the gist is that the city of Wichita and the state of Kansas are now hotbeds in the battle over abortion rights. Actually, he refers to these spots as the hosts in a new “war.” Other authors and columnists also commonly refer to the current state of the battle over abortion rights as a “war.”

Hyperbole.

I will admit that there may have been some semblance of a “war” in the 1980’s and 1990’s when abortion clinics were being bombed and abortion doctors were being stalked, threatened, attacked and killed. It was domestic terrorism, pure and simple – and I was in the middle of it. But I put the word “war” in quotes because, to me, a war is when two sides are engaged in the battle. In that case, the bombs were being planted and the shots were being fired by one side only. Yes, to be fair, the attacks were coming from a violent fringe of the anti-abortion movement, but it was a one-sided assault nonetheless. We never shot back.

But, to define today’s situation in Wichita or the nation as a “war” is laughable. Nationally, although there are some exceptions, the average abortion clinic no longer has to deal with anti-abortion protestors. If they do, it’s usually a handful of octogenarians who barely have enough energy to yell “Don’t Kill Your Baby!” After taking their morning medication, these “warriors” will grab their twenty year old sign, take the bus out to the clinic and, depending on the weather, stand out front in a pathetic effort to “save babies.” Of course, the

y rarely succeed. It’s actually a sorry scene compared to years ago when anti-abortion groups like Operation Rescue could conger up hundreds of people at a moment’s notice to block access to a clinic. Protestors were regularly arrested and sent to jail. On the other hand, I’ll bet you that not more than 10 people have been arrested in the last few years for blocking access to an abortion clinic. At the same time, folks like Randall Terry, the founder of Operation Rescue, Joe Scheidler and Pat Mahoney have virtually disappeared. In fact, here is a question for you: can you name one national anti-abortion leader?

On the other side of the coin, the abortion clinic escort movement, which helped many women get through the crowds of pro-lifers, has also virtually disappeared. Of course, that is good news in that there is no great need for these courageous folks who volunteered their time to help women obtain an abortion.

I have no doubt that another doctor will ultimately get killed, a clinic will be vandalized, and some staffer will one night get a death threat. But – and I don’t mean to sound cavalier about this – this is part of the territory. When a person signs up to work in an abortion clinic, they understand the risks. It’s the same for a firefighter or a policeman.

But, despite the occasional incident carried out by some bored pro-lifer, for the life of me I cannot fathom how anyone can suggest that there is some kind of “war” in Wichita or anywhere else over the abortion issue. It might sell a book or two, but it’s a totally silly suggestion.

Hyperbole.

February 12, 2011

The Candidate’s Speech

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, Catholic, Church, Congressman, CPCs Criminal Activity, Crisis Pregnancy Centers (CPCS) | Tags: Abortion, abortion catholic catholics rights, abortion clinics pill, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Pill, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, anti abortion, birth control, emergency contraception, history, Late Abortion, Late Term Abortion, Pro-choice, Terrorism, Vote |
[79] Comments

Candidate's Speech

The candidate walks into the jam-packed auditorium at Calvin Coolidge High School. The district he seeks to represent has elected both Republicans and Democrats. The residents are independent thinkers who are very serious about the social issues of the day. As the candidate strides up to the podium, he looks over the crowd and sees a number of pro-life and pro-choice signs. It seems evenly divided. Personally, the candidate believes abortion should be legal but has some concerns about its usage. He is truly in the middle somewhere. But the conventional wisdom says that the candidate should just put their lot into one of the camps and stick with that position. This candidate is different and tonight his goal is to defy that conventional wisdom by appealing to the activists on both sides:

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I’ve been asked to give you my views on the abortion issue tonight. Generally it is not an assignment that the average candidate looks forward to but I guess I’m a little different. I’ve actually been excited about this prospect.

Let me start by saying that I respect those of you who are pro-life and those of you who are pro-choice. This is probably the most controversial issue of our time and I honestly believe that all of you are well- intentioned. Unfortunately, the media loves to focus on the negative, so they will cover the extremists on both sides. That is not fair because I firmly believe that the average activist comes from a good place, has deep- seeded convictions and is not shy about expressing them. Indeed, I applaud you all for standing up for what you believe.

Now, I’m gonna be straight with you. I’m not the typical politician who tries to have it both ways. You deserve to know where I stand.

I believe abortion must remain legal in this country. To me, it is a matter of a woman’s health. I am a great student of history and, as everyone knows, before abortion was legalized in this country, many women were dying from botched, unsafe back alley abortions or were being severely harmed. We can all quibble about how many women we’re talking about but, for me, the numbers don’t matter. Women will always seek out abortions and, if that is the case, then I prefer they be safe.

At the same time, however, I think the pro-choice folks need to fess up. Abortion is a form of killing. A woman sitting in the abortion clinic waiting room has something – and you can decide what you want to call that something – in her body. It is something that, if not aborted, will ultimately become a child. It is a living organism. Indeed, if it was a wanted pregnancy, we would be calling it a “baby” from day one. Then, when the woman leaves the clinic, that organism is no longer alive. To me, that is “killing.” It’s a sad process, one that no one wants to experience. It’s a very sad fact of life.

Sides of the Issue

But here’s the good news. The number of abortions in this country is decreasing. It’s hard to say what is causing that trend, but I would like to give credit to both sides of the issue. For example, the pro-choice folks like to emphasize birth control education. The pro-lifers hope to “protect” women by pointing out how some women ultimately regret their abortions. Whatever the reason, the number is going down and that is a good thing.

Now, although I support abortion, I am very concerned that some women might be getting later terms abortions for less than compelling reasons. That’s why I would support banning third trimester abortions unless the woman’s life was endangered or if there was a possibility of her experiencing severe health consequences. I don’t think a woman should have an abortion at that stage for some less-than-serious reason.

I will add that I can support the work of so-called crisis pregnancy centers as long as they are totally candid up front about their opposition to abortion. If a woman clearly understands that she is basically going into a pro-life center andshe still wants to talk to them, then go for it. I have no problem with that. In addition, I will vigorously support the right of pro-life activists to protest in front of a clinic. That is the essence of the First Amendment.

Although I support legal abortion, I am torn about the use of taxpayer’s dollars for abortions. I understand how the pro-lifers don’t want their tax dollars used to fund something that they find morally objectionable and they have all the right in the world to try to pass laws restricting the use of those dollars. Indeed, in my earlier days I supported efforts to de-fund the Vietnam War. On the other hand, I am troubled by the thought of a woman on welfare with four children not being able to use her Medicaid card for an abortion because it means we all will be paying more money to help her raise yet another (unwanted) child. It’s a tough one for me and I would like to sit down with representatives on both sides of that issue.

Abortion is not a black and white issue to me. It is very, very complicated. In the meantime, however, if I am elected to Congress I will work hard to make it easier for couples to adopt, I will support using federal dollars for contraceptives. I will support any educational effort that has the same goal as we all do – to eliminate the need for abortion in this country. I ask you all to consider supporting me. I support legal abortion but I will work as hard as anybody to eliminate the need for it.

Thank you very much.

November 28, 2010

Thanks to Some Folks

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Doctors that Have Lost Their Medical License, Abortion Information, Abortion Pill, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, David Gunn Jr., Doctor David Gunn, Ellie Smeal, Roe V Wade, Sanger, Senator Bob Packwood, Susan Hill, Uneducated, Vote | Tags: Abortion, abortion clinics pill, Abortion Pill, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, anti abortion, birth control, emergency contraception, Late Abortion, Roe V Wade, Terrorism, Vote |
[42] Comments

Okay, I know this is gonna sound corny but I really would like to take this time to give “thanks” to a few people who I believe have made significant contributions to the fight for reproductive rights.

Ellie Smeal

ELLIE SMEAL: For as long as I can remember, Ellie has been the head of the Feminist Majority Foundation. For many years before we met, she was an outspoken leader for the Equal Rights Amendment but at some point she segued over to the abortion rights cause. For a woman with so much inf

luence in the halls of Congress and in the White House, Ellie is one of the most unassuming people I have ever met. Years ago, when the anti-abortion terrorists started blowing up clinics and shooting our doctors, it was Ellie and her Foundation that stepped up to provide security for the abortion clinics. She was the one who arranged security briefings at the Department of Justice and spent a lot of money to protect the providers in the field. She was not always successful in her efforts, but she never stopped trying.

SENATOR BOB PACKWOOD: Okay, before you say it, I know Packwood was kind of a sleaze ball. I

Senator Bob Packwood

remember as well as anyone the sexual harassment, the womanizing and all of the other stuff. But, I have to say that before the allegations came to light Bob Packwood was always there for the pro-choice movement. He was our leader, no doubt about it. He was one of the first elected officials to go out there and say the frigging “A” word. He led the filibuster against the proposed constitutional amendment that would have banned abortion. Indeed, I remember how he actually pissed some other pro-choice Senators off because he wanted to be the ONLY Senator out there engaging in the filibuster. Such was his ego. Ultimately, under his leadership we sounded defeated the constitutional amendment.

DOCTOR GEORGE TILLER: So much has been said about the late George Tiller. Let me just say that he was a man of his convictions. He did not hide, he spoke honestly about his work, he vigorously defended the right of a woman to obtain a late term abortion. He was a politically savvy physician who contributed thousands and thousands of dollars to help elect pro-choice candidates. He supported the national organizations that supported the abortion providers. He was our leader – plain and simple.

DAVID GUNN, JR: After his father, Doctor David Gunn, was assassinated as he approached his abortion clinic in Pensacola, David Gunn Jr. burst onto the national scene. Many people in the abortion provider community did not know his father, but we all quickly “adopted” David, Jr. The first time that most people saw him was when he appeared on “The Donohue Show” just a week after the murder. Millions of people came to admire the young man who sat on the stage stoically while he listened to Mr. Paul Hill suggest that his father’s murder was “justifiable homicide.” After that appearance, David went on a speaking tour (despite struggling with an obvious stutter) and raised money for a number of abortion provider organizations. At one point, he even offered to have his photo taken to be used in a full page New York Times ad to raise money for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers. Over the years, David and I became good friends but today I have no idea where David is.

THE NOVEMBER GANG: This small “support group” of abortion rights activists took me under their wing when I joined the National Coalition of Abortion Providers. For years, they served as my moral compass and my political conscience, both professionally and personally. I was able to let my hair down with these folks and got through some very rough times because of them. Many thanks to Renee, Charlotte, Claire, Peg and the others…..

Finally, thanks to my spouse and my two boys for putting up with all of the “stuff” that they had to endure when I was out there representing the abortion provider cause. You have no idea what they went through over those years.

November 21, 2010

My First Abortion Clinic

Posted by Pat Richards under Aborticentrism, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Centers, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion Oval Office, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Politics, Susan Hill | Tags: Abortion, abortion clinics pill, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Pill, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Terrorism, Abortion Violence, abortions, advocate, birth control, Pat Richards, politics, Pro-choice, Pro-Life, Supreme Court |
[53] Comments

Capitol Hill Hallway

When I was the chief lobbyist for the National Abortion Rights Action League in the early 1980’s, I had absolutely no contact with abortion clinics. Some people might find that ironic, but the fact was that I spent most of my time roaming the halls of Capitol Hill trying to stop legislative attacks on the right to abortion. I never talked about the actual abortion procedure. Abortion providers and their world were totally foreign to me. I just devoted my time to trying to preserve Roe v Wade and the constitutional right to privacy.

But like most Americans, I had a vision in my mind about what those abortion clinics looked like and how they operated. It was not a nice vision because in some ways I had bought into the anti-abortion propaganda about the “abortion mills.” And there was no one to rebut their claims as the clinics had no lobbyists, no public relations person.

Years later, when I joined the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I realized that I had to get out there and visit the abortion clinics. So, I started making phone calls, asking the owners or administrators if they would mind if I came to their clinic for a visit. I expected to get mostly negative reactions, figuring they wouldn’t want me to see their clinics but the reaction was just the opposite. Instead, people were thrilled that anyone from the “outside world” would want to see their facility. They welcomed me with open arms.

The first abortion clinic I ever stepped into was the Raleigh Women’s Health Organization, a facility that was operated by my dear friend, Susan Hill. I drove down on a Monday morning, met her at her house and we drove together to her clinic. I was first struck when we pulled into a beautiful business park. For some reason, I had been prepared to wind up in the slums of Raleigh. Instead, we turned a corner and I say a beautiful free-standing building surrounded by a number of mature oak trees and a sprawling green lawn. And right out front, showing they had nothing to hide, was a sign saying “Raleigh Women’s Health Organization.”

We went through the front door and I lost my breath. In the reception area were about 15 women sitting together. The room was pristine with sunlight coming through the skylights and there was a whiff of lavender in the air. I then noticed several fresh Iris plants in tall vases. Classical music was being piped in through the facility. I was stunned – and embarrassed because I had been expecting something much worse.

We went back to the staff room for some coffee, then Susan introduced me to her two (surprisingly)

Waiting Room

young doctors. They were not the sleazeball “abortionists” that I had envisioned. They were Ob-Gyns with diplomas from the top medical schools and what came across during our conversation was how proud they were of the work they were performing. The rest of the staff had the same positive attitude. For a place that was hosting women in less than ideal circumstances, the clinic was a surprisingly upbeat place.

Later on, when most of the patients were done with their procedure, Susan escorted me into the recovery room. There were about 10 women resting in warm, fuzzy reclining chairs with warm, fuzzy afghans. They were sipping some kind of tea and eating cookies. I was surprised that some were talking to each other. I’m not saying that they were having a downright party but it was nothing like I had expected.

When it was time for me to leave, I said goodbye to the staff and thanked them for all the great work they were performing. Then I walked outside and saw my first anti-abortion protestors. They had apparently come just after I entered the clinic (which I never understood because they had missed their chance to harass the women as they came into the facility). There were about thirty of them, all men, holding very ugly signs and screaming at me. There was no way they could have known who I was but they probably just assumed I was associated with the clinic.

At that very moment, I actually felt my first surge of pride as the representative for the clinics. I was emboldened and anxious to go back to Washington, D.C. to represent the staff at the Raleigh Women’s Health Organization and the hundreds of other clinics like them across the country.

I learned that day that abortion facilities were mere medical offices but with a special touch. I learned that the anti-abortion propaganda that I had been listening to for years was just that – propaganda. And I learned that the real “ugliness” in the abortion field was outside the clinic, not inside.

November 15, 2010

Gloria’s Six Abortions

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Late, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rates, Abortion Rights, Bad Apples, Liberal, Lies, Methotrexate, Not Informed, Pat Richards, Politics, Pregnancy Test, Psychology, Roe V Wade, RU486, Sanger, Uneducated | Tags: Abortion, Abortion Pill, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence, abortions, advocate, anti abortion, birth control, emergency contraception, history, morning after pill, Pat Richards, politics, Pro-choice, reproductive rights, rights, Roe V Wade |
[111] Comments

Abortion

In early 1991, just months after the formation of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I hopped in a car and drove around the Midwest visiting clinics to get educated on the provision of abortion services. One of my first stops was at a clinic in Arkansas.

I had a good initial meeting with the physician (who offered me a joint that he had been keeping in his desk drawer), then I met with the administrator for about two hours to discuss how clinics are run. Very educational. At one point, we started talking about the reasons why women have abortions and I mentioned how I’d love to meet a woman who was going to have an abortion. The administrator responded “well, that shouldn’t be a problem. You need to talk to Gloria.”

I learned that Gloria was in for her 6^th abortion. I couldn’t believe it and my initial reaction was that I needed to know why this was happening because, if I was going to represent abortion providers on Capitol Hill, I needed to know how to respond to charges of women “abusing” abortion. The administrator left the room to ask Gloria if she was willing to talk to me and she came back within a minute and said that Gloria would “love” to talk to me.

Gloria was in her mid-thirties. She was what my father would call “a sassy broad.” She was very confident, had a bee-hive hairdo and, from the crusty tone of her voice, a heavy smoker. She was chewing gum as we spoke. Probably worked as a waitress at the local diner. You get the picture..

I told her that I was just hired to fight for abortion rights, which she appreciated, then I told her I needed to know why she was at the clinic for her sixth abortion.

“Well,’ she said, “the first time the condom broke. The next time my boyfriend said he didn’t want to use a condom and threatened to beat me if I insisted on using one. The third time, I had gone on new birth control pills and there was some problem with them, don’t remember the details. The fourth time, I was raped by two truckers outside of the Rusty Skillet café in Little Rock. The fifth time. Geez, I can’t remember what happened the fifth time. Then this time I was just playing Lady’s Luck.”

Medical Office

“What is Lady’s Luck?” I asked.

“Well, I was not on birth control, didn’t want to use a condom so I just kept my fingers crossed and hoped that I had good luck. I actually should have just kept my legs crossed, huh?”

During her story, she kept cracking her gum and when she was done she looked at me coldly and said “Any more questions?”

I asked how she felt at that moment, knowing she’d be going in for anotherabortion in about 30 minutes. She said she felt fine. “I’ve been through this before, I know what to expect.” She was a rock, ready to get on with her life. Then, to my surprise, she asked me if I wanted to go in with her to the surgery room. I said yes.

We walked in and the nurse put her on the table and started prepping her. Then the doctor came in and said a few words to her before he got started. Gloria looked at me and then reached her hand out to me. I grabbed it and she squeezed. I then saw the doctor insert a tube into her and heard a vacuum-like sound. I looked at Gloria and she had tears in her eyes. I asked if she was okay and she said “I am such a loser. I have got to get my act together.” I started to well up myself. The nurse asked if she wanted to proceed and Gloria said “let’s do it” and the process was complete within minutes.

Abortion

Later, in the recovery room Gloria was her old feisty, gum cracking self, ready to go out to her cold harsh world and kick some ass. She hugged me as she was leaving and said “thanks for being there.”

When she left, the nurse came over to me and said “she cries all the time. We always ask her if she really wants to do this and she always tells us yes.”

Thanks for the education, Gloria, you sassy ole broad….

October 5, 2010

Go Get ‘Em, Bill

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion, Abortion & Religion, Abortion Advocates, Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Heroes, Abortion Information, Abortion Law, Abortion lies, Abortion Medical, Abortion Pill, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence | Tags: Abortion, abortion clinics pill, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Pill, Abortion Providers, Abortion Rights, Abortion Violence, advocate, history, Late Abortion, morning after pill, politics, Pro-choice, Pro-Life, reproductive rights, Roe V Wade, Supreme Court, Vote |
[25] Comments

Abortion

Bill Baird.

The self-proclaimed “Father of the Abortion Rights Movement.”

On April 6, 1967, before an overflow audience in excess of 2,000 people, he spoke at Boston University about the public’s right to privacy in matters of sexuality, including the right to birth control and abortion. At the end of the lecture he was promptly arrested by members of the Boston police department’s vice squad and charged with publicly exhibiting birth control and abortion devices and giving away a single condom and package of contraceptive foam to a nineteen-year-old, unmarried female student. The event made headlines nationwide. He spent months in jail. As far as I know, he is the only private person to have two Supreme Court cases in his name, both dealing with the right to privacy.

Now, Bill Baird is close to 80 years old and is barely making it on his social security payments. In addition, he has been a pariah within the pro-choice community for decades.

Things started going downhill for Bill years ago when charges of womanizing started spreading throughout the feminist community. Who knows if the allegations were true or not? All I know is that Bill would tell me stories about how women practically attacked him, but it didn’t matter. The stories were already out there and could not be roped in. Contributing to his fall from grace was his constant self-promotion. Whenever he went to a pro-choice convention or if he just had the ear of one person, the conversation was all about him, all about his Supreme Court cases, all about his press releases (which he literally carried around with him). He was clearly yearning for attention. It was both obnoxious and pathetic at the same time.

When I joined the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I ran into

Abortion

him at some event and he told me he needed money to attend the annual “Right to Life” convention. I asked him why he would even go to their meeting and he said he thought it was important to protest outside their hotel. He bragged about how his protests would get “lots of media attention.” At one point, he even told me that the anti-abortion folks were very interested in paying him money if he came over to their side. I always suspected that was a bunch of crap and that he was telling me this in the hopes that our side would give him money instead. It was just an exhausting and very sad occasion whenever I saw him.

Then, in 1993 NCAP decided to celebrate the 20^th anniversary of Roe

vWade with a formal, black-tie dinner dance at the elegant Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. It was the first of its kind and we invited a number of pro-choice “celebrities” to join us. As much as I knew how Bill rubbed folks the wrong way, I felt he should be invited to the event because of how much he had done for our cause.

So, I called him and told him we’d like him to join us as one of our “dignitaries.” He started crying. He said through his tears that he hadn’t been invited to a pro-choice function in decades and he thanked me profusely. Then he added “but, Pat, I can’t afford to rent a tuxedo.”

“Okay, let me work on that Bill.”

Within hours, I was talking to Susan Hill, one of the original founders of NCAP and not one of Bill’s fans, but she still offered to pay for his tuxedo. I called him back and told him to make plans to come to Washington. We paid for his hotel room as well. For the first time, Bill Baird was speechless.

The day of the dinner dance, I gave Bill the opportunity to talk to our

membership to give them a historical perspective of his work. He was getting a great reaction until he said at one point that he felt the pro-choice community had an “obligation” to pay him money for all the work he had done for them over the years. In the audience were other leaders of the movement who had sacrificed just as much. His comments were incredibly obnoxious – and it was textbook Bill Baird. Always making trouble. Always approaching things with a sense of entitlement.

Of course, he was oblivious to the fact that he had once again pissed everyone off. So, that night he came to the dinner party, all dressed up in his rented tuxedo. He took the opportunity to catch up with some old friends, if they could actually be called “friends.” I even saw him dancing later on in the evening with Susan. He was beaming all night. As he was leaving, he came up and gave me a big hug and said “I’ll never forget what you did for me.”

Abortion

The next day, on the front page of the “Style” section of the Washington Post, there was a big photograph of Bill Baird, surrounded by the press, holding court. He was in his element. He had yet another press article for his collection.

After that night, Bill went back to New York. When Susan Hill died, I called him and I could hear him sobbing. When he got composed, he told me how he needed money to go to the next Right to Life convention. “There’s still a lot of work to be done, Pat” he said before he hung up.

Go get ‘em, Bill.

August 22, 2010

Thank you, Shannon Locke

Posted by Pat Richards under Abortion Blog, Abortion Candidates, Abortion Centers, Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Discussion, Abortion Doctor, Abortion Information, Abortion lies, Abortion MisInformation, Abortion Pregnancy Centers, Congressman, CPCs Criminal Activity, Obama is Pro Choice, Shannon Locke, Wyden | Tags: Abortion Catholics, Abortion Crisis Pregnancy Centers, Abortion Priests, Abortion Violence, Crisis Pregnancy Criminal Activites, Late Abortion, Obama, Obama is Pro Choice, Pro-Life, ProLife Criminals, ProLife Murderers, Shannon Locke, Wyden |
[103] Comments

Abortion Clinics & Congressman Wyden & Abortion CPCs

Sometimes one person can make a difference.

Her name was Shannon Locke. In 1991, she was living in Arkansas when she discovered she was pregnant. She decided to have an abortion. So, she picked up her Yellow Page book and under the “Abortion” category she saw an ad for the “Central Arkansas Crisis Pregnancy Center.” What attracted her attention was that they offered “free pregnancy tests.” She called the clinic and, when she asked how much the abortion cost, the receptionist said she wasn’t at her desk and couldn’t check the price. Still, Shannon made the appointment.

When she arrived at the facility, Shannon was greeted by several people wearing white lab coats. She filled out some paperwork and was escorted to a waiting room where she was told she had to watch a tape about abortion. Shannon sat there for about ten minutes, watching a film replete with pictures of mangled fetuses. At some point, Shannon realized she was not in an abortion clinic and left in an almost traumatized state. Ultimately, she obtained her abortion in Little Rock.

Months later, in my capacity as a staff person for the National Coalition of Abortion Providers, I met Kim Farrell, the administrator of Little Rock Family Planning Services. At one point, Kim told me about Shannon Locke’s story (without revealing her real name). I had no idea there were such things as “phony abortion clinics” but Kim gave me a good education. The next day, I started calling random clinics and discovered that these facilities were all over the country. We soon discovered an actual manual published by the Pearson Foundation, an anti-abortion group, which gave instructions on how to set up a “crisis pregnancy center.” Among some of the tips were: adopt a name similar to the real abortion clinic, get a building as close as you can to the real clinic, wear clothing that makes your office look like a medical facility.

About a week later, Congressman Ron Wyden of Oregon told me he had just become the chairman of a committee that had jurisdiction over consumer protection issues. I immediately thought about how “consumers,” i.e., patients, were being defrauded by these anti-abortion clinics. I told him about this national problem and we devised a plan to hold a congressional hearing to expose the existence of these facilities. And, to get us as much national exposure as possible, I knew we needed a “star witness.” That’s when I thought of the young woman in Little Rock.

Working with Kim, we convinced Shannon, who was 19 at the time, to fly to Washington to testify. I met her at her hotel that morning and she was understandably very nervous. I have to admit I felt like I was using her, but I kept thinking of the greater good. That morning she was the lead witness at a packed hearing. This is an excerpt from her testimony:

I thought it was an abortion clinic because the ad said “free pregnancy testing, abortion information.”…I was taken to a small room and the lady explained to me that I was about to watch a film on abortion and I would enjoy it. I felt forced to view the film in order to know the result of my pregnancy test. The film showed very pregnant women entering clinics and showed abortions in the late stages of pregnancy. The film said the abortions were on women who were 8 to 10 weeks pregnant, but all of the women had cantaloupe-size bellies. The films said that abortion caused women to bleed to death, never have children again, and many women had hysterectomies….the lady started telling me I was killing a life that is God-given and that a fetus is a baby at the time of conception. . .One week after I received my abortion, a person from the Central Arkansas Crisis Pregnancy Center called my mom’s home. I had listed her number as an emergency contact on the medical form (Shannon did not want her mother to know about her abortion). I advocate against the businesses existing because women like me will continue to look in the Yellow Pages and be fooled.. .Women who look in the Yellow Pages for abortion want an abortion and not harassment.

There was not a dry eye in the house.

The hearings made national news. Shannon Locke had told millions of women of the existence of these phony abortion clinics. On a side note, she had also told the world that she had had an abortion and when she got back to Arkansas, being a national “celebrity,” she faced incessant harassment from the local anti-abortion movement. It was an unbelievably courageous act.

A few days later, I got a call from the lobbyist who represented the Yellow Pages. He said that they had no idea that these facilities were not real clinics and that they wanted to correct the situation. About a month later, the Yellow Pages established a new category for these anti-abortion centers called “Abortion Alternatives.” Under the heading, they put in language warning consumers that the facilities listed in that category did not perform abortions.

Over the years, these crisis pregnancy centers have continued to ply their trade (as evidence by the recent HBO documentary). But, after all the publicity generated by this congressional hearing, the number of women who unwittingly went to the anti-abortion centers dropped dramatically. Hundreds of thousands of women were now educated about these facilities.

Go pick up your Yellow Page book and see the “Abortion Alternatives” category.

Then, take a moment to thank Shannon Locke.

%d bloggers like this:

	Jonnielyn Velez on Republicans Want 12 Randos to…
	Emily on Abortion Commenting
	Civil War in America… on Portland to cut trade, travel…
	buyabortionrx on The FDA Should Remove Its Rest…
	Casino Icon on National Abortion Fund Launche…
	kellymirano on US agency says women can get a…

Abortion – Abortion Clinics, Abortion Pill, Abortion Information