Sniping, Not Debating: The Center for Medical Progress Videos

The following guest post comes to us via a Planned Parenthood Arizona volunteer.

health care providersI watched or read the first few full-length videos and transcripts posted by the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) beginning July 25, 2015. No doubt, coming weeks will bring more videos, but I would be surprised if they stray from themes of this first batch. In a nutshell, the heavily edited videos assert that uncompassionate Planned Parenthood representatives violate laws against collecting and selling fetal tissue for profit, “haggle” over pricing, and discuss abortion procedures and tissue in a distasteful, chilling manner.

I’m pretty weary of (though never surprised by) folks who oppose a woman’s right to make her own child-bearing decisions. Why? In this case, opponents refuse to stand and fight on the merits of their arguments. Instead, they use sniping tactics that trigger emotions and ignore facts.

CMP selected snippets of their hidden-camera videos to concoct a narrative not supported by the unedited videos. Consider these snippets they left out.

Planned Parenthood affiliates help WOMEN donate THEIR fetal tissue for medical research.

Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s senior director of medical services, spoke of the demand for fetal tissue donation programs:

“Patients will call up, make an appointment, and say, ‘I would like to donate my tissue.’ And the affiliates are really feeling like, ‘Oh, wow, I really need to figure out a way to get this done.’ Because patients are talking about — you know, in general, in health care, a provider is not going to offer a service unless there’s demand. And there is a demand now, I mean, women know that this is something that they can do.”

Continue reading

ACT NOW! Congress to Vote TODAY on 20-Week Abortion Ban

It’s Crunch Time!

Votes on Final Passage of HR 36, the 20-week abortion ban, are expected after 1 p.m. Arizona Time (4 p.m. EST) TODAY!

Please ask your Member of Congress to speak out & vote against HR 36 — the 20-Week Abortion Ban. (Click here to find out what congressional district you live in.)

AZ-01 Ann Kirkpatrick          202-225-3361

AZ-02 Martha McSally          202-225-2542

AZ-03 Raul Grijalva               202-225-2435

AZ-04 Paul Gosar                 202-225-2315

AZ-05 Matt Salmon               202-225-2635

AZ-06 David Schweikert       202-225-2190

AZ-07 Ruben Gallego            202-225-4065

AZ-08  Trent Franks               202-225-4576 (sponsor of HR 36)

AZ-09 Kyrsten Sinema           202-225-9888

Tomorrow: Congress Votes on Abortion

Editor’s Note: The following post was written by Esteban Camarena.

US CongressWithin a week of returning to the Capitol, the new majority of the House of Representatives initiated once more a confrontation against women’s health by introducing legislation that would limit access to the legal and medically safe procedure of terminating a pregnancy. Legislation that is being proposed would place legislative burdens for a woman, if she chooses, to go to a doctor and undergo an abortion 20 weeks after gestation.

In the United States, a great majority of abortions occur before 21 weeks. Those that occur after that time frame are commonly due to severe fetal abnormalities and risks to the life of the mother. Due to this fact, many doctors are opposed to this type of law because it prevents them from providing the best medical care possible to their patients. A majority of doctors recognize that abortion is a very safe medical procedure; in fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 99 percent of women who undergo this procedure do not demonstrate any complication.

The majority of Americans agree that Congress should focus on more pertinent issues. What occurs between a doctor and his or her patient is very personal, and frankly a politician has no business interfering in that relationship. Every woman needs to be able to make her own medical decisions in consultation with her faith, family, and doctor. It is important to protect this right and tell politicians that it not their health, and it is not their decision.

Mañana: El Congreso Vota Sobre el Aborto

Este artículo es por Esteban Camarena.

US CongressA una semana de regresar a la Capital, la nueva mayoría en la Cámara de Representantes inicio otra vez un enfrentamiento contra la salud de la mujer ya que quiere limitar el acceso legal y medicamente sano a la terminación de un embarazo. La ley que se propone pondría limites legislativos para una mujer, si ella lo decide, acudir a un médico y someterse al procedimiento de aborto después de 20 semanas de gestación.

En los Estados Unidos, gran mayoría de abortos ocurren antes de 21 semanas y los casos en que este procedimiento ocurre después de ese tiempo comúnmente involucran anormalidades severas del feto y riesgos a la vida de la madre. Es por eso que muchos doctores se oponen a este tipo de ley ya que imponen barreras no necesarias a proveer el mejor cuidado médico a sus pacientes. Mayoría de doctores reconocen que el aborto es un procedimiento sumamente seguro, de hecho 99 por ciento de mujeres que se someten a este tratamiento no demuestran complicación alguna según el Centro de Control y Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC).

La mayoría de estadounidenses están de acuerdo que el Congreso necesita enfocarse en asuntos más pertinentes. Lo que ocurre entre un doctor y su paciente es algo muy personal y francamente un legislador no tiene ningún negocio en interponerse en esa relación. Cada mujer necesita poder hacer decisiones medicas en consulta de su fe, su familia, y su doctor. Es importante proteger este derecho y decirle a los políticos que no es su salud y no es su decisión.

Supreme Court Rules Against Women in Hobby Lobby and Buffer Zone Cases

Five out of six male Supreme Court justices voted in favor of Hobby Lobby's right to deny full contraceptive benefits. Their opinion does not represent the entire male population. Photo: NARAL

Five out of six male Supreme Court justices voted in favor of Hobby Lobby’s right to deny full contraceptive benefits. Their opinion does not represent the entire male population. Photo: NARAL

On the morning of June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court (or should I say the men of the Supreme Court) ruled in favor of two corporations, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, who argued that they should not have to provide insurance coverage for their employees’ birth control, as required by the Affordable Care Act, because of the business owners’ personal religious beliefs.

The court stated that when corporations are “closely held” and it can be shown that the owners operate the business consistently with certain religious beliefs, then these corporations can be exempted from federal laws that burden those religious beliefs.


Emergency contraception and IUDs work primarily by preventing fertilization, and won’t interfere with existing pregnancies.


The “beliefs” in question held by these two corporations concern two forms of birth control — emergency contraception and IUDs (intrauterine devices). But their “beliefs,” that emergency contraception and IUDs are abortifacients, aren’t rooted in actual science.

Here are the details.

Hobby Lobby believes that “life begins at conception.” They define “conception” as the time at which a sperm and egg combine to create a zygote.

The medical community, including the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), defines conception as the point at which a fertilized egg implants in the uterus. According to ACOG, the term “conception” properly means implantation. Continue reading

National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers

Editor’s Note: The following is a guest post by Brittany Sevek, our communications and marketing intern, who is a fourth-year journalism student at Arizona State University.

We are currently in the midst of “40 Days for Life.” Spanning from February 13 through March 24, “40 Days for Life” is a campaign that coincides with the 40 days of Lent. Participants in the campaign protest against abortion, seek to discourage women from having abortions, and even hope to shut down health centers that provide abortion care entirely. At a time like this, when people are openly rallying against the very things Planned Parenthood works to protect, it is important to take a minute to reflect upon and appreciate those who have labored so hard to support women’s rights and maintain access to health care.


We should be able to get health care without fear of violence, harassment, or intimidation.


Another important date in regards to abortion falls within these 40 days: March 10. Many are probably unaware that March 10 is designated as National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers. Established in 1996, National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers was founded to commemorate the life of Dr. David Gunn. Unfortunately, March 10 marks the anniversary of Dr. David Gunn’s 1993 assassination — 20 years ago this Sunday.

Dr. David Gunn was a physician and abortion provider in rural Alabama, and was assassinated in Pensacola, Florida, at an anti-abortion rally. Shot three times in the back, Dr. Gunn was killed by an anti-abortion extremist. Gunn’s death is noted as the first assassination of an abortion provider. Since then, there has been a total of nine murders of abortion providers and other clinic personnel, according to the National Abortion Federation.

Even those who support a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions do not generally consider the risks and dangers to which abortion providers are subjected in order to continue providing their services. The National Abortion Federation tracks statistics of acts of violence and disruption against abortion providers. These acts range from murder, attempted murder, death threats, hate mail, stalking, bombing, arson, vandalism, and even acid attacks. In 2001, a record total of 795 acts of violence were committed against abortion providers. These numbers dropped for several years, but spiked again in 2005 when 761 incidents of violence occurred. Thankfully, in recent years this number has dropped dramatically: 2011 saw 113 violent acts committed.

However, this number is still 113 violent acts too many. It is therefore crucial to honor those who put themselves at risk every day. By taking the time on March 10, and every day, to commemorate and recognize these abortion providers for supporting women’s rights, we can raise awareness about this otherwise unspoken issue. In turn, we can continue to diminish these numbers, and hopefully stop such terrible acts of violence from occurring in the future.

A Conversation With Faye Wattleton: Part 4, Looking Back

Faye Wattleton was president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America from 1978 to 1992. She was generous enough to speak to me on January 7, 2013, and throughout the month of February we’ve shared her experiences and perspectives in observance of Black History Month. In this final installment, we look at her thoughts about her time at PPFA and her life after leaving Planned Parenthood.

In 1970, just a few years after receiving her master’s degree, Faye Wattleton left the Dayton Health Department and the Visiting Nurses Association to serve as executive director for Planned Parenthood of Miami Valley in Ohio. While she was there, the Roe v. Wade decision was handed down, and when a local reporter asked for a comment, Ms. Wattleton realized that her affiliate had no prepared statement. As she wrote in her autobiography, “The national offices had communicated no strategy for addressing the implications of such a landmark decision.”


“The exercise of safe reproductive health services and choices for women around the world is vital to the planet.”


At the time, no one had known what to expect from the Supreme Court, and the ruling came as a shock to Wattleton and her colleagues. But the Roe v. Wade decision would eventually thrust Planned Parenthood into the highly politicized abortion debate, despite the fact that their mission was — and is — broader than that, focusing most of their energies on contraception, preventive care, and education.

When Ms. Wattleton became Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s president in 1978, the organization had become, according to a 1979 Time Magazine article, “as all-American as the Girl Scouts and debutante parties.” But Ms. Wattleton restructured the national office staff in preparation for increasing political challenges, while continuing to expand medical and education services. During her first year, more than 60 percent of the national managerial staff left the organization.

Reflecting on the restructuring, Ms. Wattleton says that had she known then what she knows now, she would have begun her tenure at PPFA differently. “I had been the executive director of a Planned Parenthood [affiliate] for seven years before I became president [of the national organization]. I felt like I really knew the organization, but what I learned [is that] anyone who has the privilege to ascend to national or international responsibilities can’t quite appreciate what it’s like, until you’re actually in the seat. Perhaps I really overestimated my perspective on some of the nuances of the importance of touching base with a number of the elements within the organization; like any other organization, Planned Parenthood has its factions.” Continue reading