Planned Parenthood funding sparks controversy

After public uproar over its decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood, Susan G. Komen for the Cure decided to continue funding existing grants last Friday.

Komen, the leader in the breast cancer awareness movement, made no promise, however, to fund them with future grants.

Annually, Planned Parenthood receives about $680,000 nationally from the Komen foundation, according to Maggie Groff, the vice president for External Affairs of Planned Parenthood Southeastern Pennsylvania.

Komen decided to stop funding 17 of the 19 Planned Parenthood affiliates they had previously been supporting. This decision was made public Jan. 31. There are 79 affiliates across the nation.

Komen adopted a new rule that stipulates they will not fund organizations that are under federal investigation. Planned Parenthood is currently being investigated by Florida Repub. representative Cliff Stearns. He is looking into whether Planned Parenthood is illegally using government money to fund abortion procedures.

Groff said Planned Parenthood has been investigated for the same reason many times but has never been found guilty of those accusations. “We very carefully separate those funds,” she said.

Komen board member and Washington lobbyist John D. Raffaelli told The New York Times that continuing to fund Planned Parenthood under these conditions would damage Komen’s credibility with donors.

However, some believe this decision was politically motivated, pointing to Komen’s founder and CEO Nancy Brinker’s relationship with the Republican Party. She served as the Chief of Protocol of the United States under George W. Bush.

Outrage from various women’s groups, health care providers, politicians and the public forced Komen to amend their decision to stop funding Planned Parenthood.

In a statement following the reversal, Brinker wrote that the Komen foundation was “distressed at the presumption that the changes made to our funding criteria were done for political reasons or to specifically penalize Planned Parenthood. They were not.”

According to Groff, Planned Parenthood received roughly $3 million nationwide within the past week from their supporters. This includes a matching grant of $250,000 from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Groff noted that all of the money they received because of this controversy will go toward breast cancer health care.

Pro-life proponents, however, support Komen’s decision to cease funding.

Planned Parenthood has been criticized for not typically providing mammograms.

Teresa Hamill, College Senior and co-president of Penn for Life — a pro-life student group — said the decision to stop giving grants to Planned Parenthood “makes sense” because they do not provide mammograms, Hamill said. “Anytime you end up giving money to Planned Parenthood, you are indirectly supporting abortion,” because you are allowing them to save funds that could go toward abortion.

Hamill said instead of giving money to Planned Parenthood, Komen should fund other clinics that provide both screenings and mammograms, which would be more efficient.

Groff said Planned Parenthood provides breast cancer screenings and refers women to a provider if a mammogram is necessary. She added that the money they received from Komen funds screening and breast cancer education.

Brian Czerniecki, a surgical oncologist at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and co-director of the Rena Rowan Breast Center at Penn, said this issue is complicated.

“Komen, I think, had good intentions when they were giving [Planned Parenthood] money,” he said, but it is Komen’s responsibility to ensure that money is going where it should go.

Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement Friday that Planned Parenthood is “enormously grateful that the Komen Foundation has clarified its grant-making criteria, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Komen partners, leaders and volunteers.”

Comments (5)

Planned Parenthood was founded to reduce the Black population of the United States. Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms. Planned Parenthood claims that only 3% of it’s activities involved abortion, but this is the result of very creative accounting. The actual figure is closer to 40%. Planned Parenthood has a long history of providing abortions without informing either parents or authorities to underage girls impregnated because they have been victims of statutory rape. By far the majority of customers of Planned Parenthood are under 35. This cohort has a very low incidence of breast cancer. A far more effective way to reduce breast cancer, the stated goal of the Komen Foundation, would be to donate money directly to organizations which actually provide mammograms a sponsor outreach to populations which are actually at risk of suffering from breast cancer.

Years ago I gave to Planned Parenthood. The more I learned about this company the spookier is became to me. I give elsewhere now so that my giving is more effectively used now.

Jesse, it’s a shame I almost began to admire you for your opinions on how to deal with the dangers of Philadelphia. I’d like to suggest you meet up with some people who believe HIV was designed in American labs to kill blacks both here and in Africa. I’m sure you would have loads to talk about.

Perhaps you should read up on PP’s history . . . while it may not have been established for that express purpose, it’s founder fully believed in the superiority of whites as well as eugenics. (Also noteworthy: Margaret Sanger opposed abortion.)

Yes, you’re correct, Sanger did not advocate abortion as a means of birth control. Whether that is a product of the lack of safe abortion techniques or her own beliefs, I cannot say. The provision of abortion came later as PP evolved. The same way that it has evolved past a founder with racist and eugenic beliefs. I don’t deny that PP profits from abortion. Maybe there’s something wrong with that…maybe there isn’t. I’m not particularly religious enough to care about the act itself.

What I do care about is freedom. You may not agree, but I consider it within a woman’s rights to have access to a safe and affordable abortion as a last resort if birth control fails. PP provides female health services mainly to people in poor areas who have no access to more regular care. There is a wide confluence of factors that causes unwanted pregnancies to be high among the poor (lack of education, lack of access, etc). Because of that and other reasons I’m sure, the provision of abortions to black women is probably higher than it “should be”. I’m guessing that’s where the “reduce the Black population of the US” claim is coming from. If you see it that way, I’m not going to bother trying to change your mind, but it’s poor people who seek these services out, not black people. If they happen to make up a large enough % of abortions that people are claiming eugenics, then perhaps we have bigger problems than where PP gets its funding?

Comments are closed for this item.