Planned Parenthood prominently displays phrases such as “trusted local provider of health information and services” on many of its affiliates’ web sites.  Do its actions back up its words?

In August 2007 Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri joined legal action to prevent enforcement of a new Missouri law.   What did that law demand?  The law requires abortion clinics to comply with the same health standards as other medical clinics.  Planned Parenthood stated the stringent requirements could result in the closing of abortion businesses that are unable to comply.  The implication of this point is that abortionists should not be required to comply with safety codes if they might be forced to close locations that do not meet health standards.  In other words, abortion availability trumps safety considerations for Planned Parenthood.  Does this action seem consistent for a “trusted” health care provider?  Should this condescending attitude assure women that Planned Parenthood really has concern for their safety?  

When filing its case to oppose the law, Planned Parenthood claimed the new regulations would require extensive remodeling to its Columbia facility that would cost $2 million.  By the time of a September 10th hearing on its legal challenge, an architect for Planned Parenthood told the judge that $600,000 or more would be needed to meet the safety codes.  Can we conclude that Planned Parenthood is not willing to spend money to improve the safety of its facilities?

We can certainly conclude that Planned Parenthood does not want any oversight on whether its facilities are safe.  Even though Planned Parenthood got $305.3 million in taxpayer funds in its last reporting year, its highly paid executives are not willing to spend money to comply with safety regulations.

But Planned Parenthood has just filed another lawsuit in Missouri.   This time they are opposing a referendum that might be placed on the ballot.   What does the referendum do?  Planned Parenthood claims the measure would ban most abortions in the state, and is trying to keep it from appearing on the ballot. 

The organization seeking signatures to place the contested referendum on the ballot is called Stop Forced Abortions Alliance.  They state their referendum “does not ban any abortions nor does it make any abortions illegal.”   So what does the referendum do?  It “clarifies in statute the duty of physicians to screen for statistically proven risk factors which identify women at higher risk of physical or negative complications of abortion” and “clarifies the duty of abortion providers to ask whether a patient is feeling pressured into the abortion.”  Provisions for recourse in cases of negligent screening “are enforced solely by injured women through civil remedies.”

Why does Planned Parenthood claim the referendum will ban most abortions?   Apparently, Planned Parenthood likes to exaggerate to get headlines when filing a lawsuit.  Maybe Planned Parenthood wants to distract people from considering their real reason for filing this lawsuit.   If this referendum passed, would it cost Planned Parenthood money?  That must be their reason for opposing the referendum! 

How would this measure cost money?  It would require Planned Parenthood’s abortionists and staff to spend more time with patients, and result in some of those patients eventually choosing against abortion.  Planned Parenthood knows this referendum will not ban a single abortion, but they cannot tell the public they refuse to spend any more time to educate women on abortion risks or to help women make their own choice in cases where they are being forced into abortion. 

Planned Parenthood wants the money from all those abortions, but they keep telling the public they are trying to reduce abortion.  This referendum would certainly reduce abortions in Missouri.  Planned Parenthood’s opposition to it proves their slogan about reducing abortions is false, and also shows once again that Planned Parenthood is much more concerned about abortion revenue than either the safety or the personal choice of the women on whom they commit abortion. 

Is that why we are learning of cases where rapists relied on Planned Parenthood to commit abortions on their victims to cover the rapes?    Missouri must be another “ground zero” for Planned Parenthood in the battle over abortion, right beside Aurora, Illinois.   And we have not even covered the 107 criminal charges filed against Planned Parenthood in Missouri!  Do you think Planned Parenthood is a “trusted local provider of health information and services”?   I think “greedy abortionist” might be a better description.