Komen reverses move to cut Planned Parenthood funding

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Feb 3, 2012.

  1. macrumors 68000

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    The power of the people speak.
    Reuters) - Susan G. Komen for the Cure said on Friday it was retreating from a decision to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and birth control services, and apologized for a move that thrust the world's largest breast cancer charity into a deeply politicized controversy.

    Komen had said earlier this week it would cease to fund grants for breast cancer screening to Planned Parenthood under new eligibility rules that preclude grants to groups under investigation by U.S. authorities.

    The move sparked a massive outcry among supporters of both groups, who believe Komen came under pressure from anti-abortion activists. Komen also faced dissent within its ranks from local chapter leaders.

    "We want to apologize to the American public for recent decisions that cast doubt upon our commitment to our mission of saving women`s lives," Komen said in a statement on Friday.

    "We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities."

    Komen said it will amend its new funding criteria to "ensure that politics has no place in our grant process."

    The reversal circulated within minutes on social media sites like Twitter, where much of the furious debate over Komen's move had been waged in the past three days.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/03/us-usa-healthcare-komen-idUSTRE8111WA20120203
     
  2. macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    Good! Nice to see this happen so quickly. It was a dumb move in the first place.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 68000

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #3
    hopefully they don't figure out a way not to do the funding later on. Like rules that disqualify or so subtle small things that add up.
     
  4. macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #4
    Nah- I think they learned their lesson.
     
  5. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #5
    Talk about ruining a stellar brand. They may have back tracked on cutting off PP but the still employ that woman who ran and lost for governor of GA. and is an avowed opponent of PP.

    Nice to see the role social media played in this.
     
  6. macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #6
    And the damage has probably been done already.
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Manhattan
    #7
    It actually worked out well for Planned Parenthood. Upon the original announcement cutting funding, they received a surge of $400,000 in donations that they wouldn't have had otherwise.
     
  8. macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #8
    Umm...good move.

    ...that shouldn't have been necessary in the first place.
     
  9. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #9
    not so fast everyone... this isn't what it appears to be and i can't say that i'm surprised given their past history. i wish they'd just be clear on what it is that they are doing right now other than a feel-good publicity stunt.

    Link.
     
  10. macrumors G4

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #10
    Good point. Still, people have their eye on the Komen foundation and any cutting of funding for Planned Parenthood in the future is likely to meet with a similar response. So, while they might not be completely backtracking on the issue, they've definitely gotten their nose bloodied over the incident.
     
  11. macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #11
    i completely agree. hopefully this helps planned parenthood in the long run because they are vital in getting people the help that they need.
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 68000

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #12
    http://studentactivism.net/2012/02/...arenthood-is-a-pr-move-not-a-policy-reversal/
    Komen Statement on Planned Parenthood is a PR Move, Not A Policy Reversal

    February 3, 2012 in Organizing, Politics, Reproductive Freedom

    The Susan G. Komen Foundation released a statement moments ago that many are greeting as a reversal of their decision to cut funding to Planned Parenthood. On Twitter, the Breaking News feed called it a “pledge to continue funding Planned Parenthood,” while Glenn Greenwald called it “an amazing, Internet-driven victory.”

    But it’s not.

    The new statement does not pledge Komen to reverse its funding decision, and it does not promise Planned Parenthood any new funding. Let’s look at the relevant passage (emphasis mine):

    “We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities.”

    Komen had never intended to renege on its existing grant commitments to Planned Parenthood, as PP themselves noted in their press release announcing the break between the two organizations (again, emphasis mine):

    “In the last few weeks, the Komen Foundation has begun notifying local Planned Parenthood programs that their breast cancer initiatives will not be eligible for new grants (beyond existing agreements or plans).“

    Komen’s statement that Planned Parenthood will be “eligible” for new grants is a new development, but it commits Komen to nothing. There’s no reversal of the funding cutoff here, and no promise to reinstate Planned Parenthood funding.

    This isn’t a victory. Not yet.

    Update | I want to be really clear about what’s going on here. Obviously, Komen has taken a huge amount of heat in the last few days, far more than they’d anticipated, and they’re scrambling to contain the damage. They’re in disarray, and trying to keep this from becoming an even bigger problem for them than it already is. This statement is a reflection of that, and in that sense it’s a good sign. But what they’re hoping this will do is take the spotlight off, and if it has that effect, they’ll have a lot of room to maneuver later. So folks who want to see Planned Parenthood refunded need to be extremely skeptical, and extremely loud in voicing their skepticism, in the near future. Keep the pressure on, keep pushing for concrete concessions. That’s the next step.

    Second Update | Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards has released a response to the Komen announcement. An excerpt:

    “In recent weeks, the treasured relationship between the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation and Planned Parenthood has been challenged, and we are now heartened that we can continue to work in partnership toward our shared commitment to breast health for the most underserved women. We are enormously grateful that the Komen Foundation has clarified its grantmaking criteria, and we look forward to continuing our partnership with Komen partners, leaders and volunteers.”

    Richards is claiming victory, in other words, without suggesting that PP has been given any specific assurances on funding. All the more reason to keep the heat on.

    I’ll be sticking with this story as it develops. Feel free to follow me on Twitter for all the latest.

    Third Update | A little more explication. First, on the eligibility question: yes, Komen has restored Planned Parenthood’s “eligibility” to apply for grants, but all that means is that PP can submit a request for funding. Without knowing what criteria Komen will use for evaluating those grant requests, and whether they’re actually committed to restoring the PP revenue stream, it’s impossible to say what significance this has. Again, yes, it’s a victory, but so far it’s a victory of spin and messaging, not of actual dollars and cents.

    Second, there’s the question of whether the new Komen position indicates that PP is likely to be reinstated as a Komen grantee. I don’t have any particular inside info, but from where I sit, yes, it’s likely, particularly given the media (mis)reading of the statement as well as PP’s (very savvy) response. It seems clear that cutting off PP down the line would be a PR disaster for Komen, and my guess is they’d rather put this behind them. But likelihood isn’t certitude, and things can change. We just don’t know what Komen’s plans are. All we have is what they’ve said. And what they’ve said so far is carefully crafted to leave the option of defunding PP very much alive.

    Fourth Update | The president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute calls Komen’s statement “nothing new. We have known and have reported that they are continuing five grants through 2012. This is a reference to that. The second clause about eligibility is certainly true. Any group can apply for anything. It does not mean they are going to get anything.”

    Fifth Update | It’s worth remembering that according to one Komen staffer, the group’s new “grant-making criteria were adopted with the deliberate intention of targeting Planned Parenthood.”

    Sixth Update | Greg Sargent of the Washington Post got a Komen board member on the phone, and he said that “it would be highly unfair to ask us to commit to any organization that doesn’t go through a grant process that shows that the money we raise is used to carry out our mission. … Tell me you can help carry out our mission and we will sit down at the table.”

    “It would be highly unfair to ask us to commit to any organization.” That’s pretty cold, particularly in contrast with Cecile Richards’ “we look forward to continuing our partnership.”
     
  13. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    #13
    Couldn't agree more. Was dumbfounded when I first heard about them cutting funding in the first place.
     
  14. stevento, Feb 3, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2012

    macrumors 6502

    stevento

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #14
    Komen has no backbone. First they cave to pro life pressure, then they cave to pro choice pressure. Wouldn't be surprised if they reversed their reversal tomorrow.


    Yeah right. Wether it's defrauding taxpayers with imaginary mammograms, or just spouting blatant lies on their website, PP is more interested in sucking up tax payer money than helping women.

    PP once said that the vast majority of abortion is done with a pill and that the fetus is usually never touched. But now, PlannedParenthood.org says that most abortion is vacuum aspiration.
    click here, then click on "what are the kinds on in clinic abortions?"
     
  15. macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #15
    I think you are getting confused. Both statements would be correct. The vast majority of abortions would be carried out pharmaceutically - either through the morning after pill, ru486 etc. those aren't done "in-clinic". For those done in-clinic it is apparently an aspiration.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    #16
    Wirelessly posted (iPhone 4s: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

    Have you ever used, or do you know anyone who uses PP for regular medical services and prenatal care? Most of what you posted is grossly misinformed, and I'd be interested where you found the information.
     
  17. likemyorbs, Feb 4, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2012

    macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #17
    You know what's fun? When conservatives lose one culture war after another. If only they actually paid attention to anything Jesus stood for when reading their bibles, this world would be so much better.
     
  18. thread starter macrumors 68000

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #18
    Amen brother.
    God according to the bible killed so many infants and pregnant woman who I can't see him caring about abortion like everyone claims.
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    SuperCachetes

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    Away from you
    #19
    QFT.

    Unfortunately, fire and brimstone like "God hates Gays" is a much easier sell than "everybody be nice to each other" in our current world. Call it the Michael Bay/James Cameron/Jerry Bruckheimer mentality... :(
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2008
    Location:
    Rio Rancho, NM
    #20
    I am no conservative and consider myself a Libertarian up to a point. I am also pro-choice, but it seems to me that Komen was bullied into granting funds to an organization they didn't want to support. And it never seemed that Komen's motivation to pull funding was because of any moral reasons, and more of an economical one. PP being under Federal investigation for misuse of taxpayer funds being the first reason. And the second being that their money could be put to better use elsewhere. How much cancer screenings or treatments are even done at PP? Probably not much.
     
  21. macrumors 6502

    fox10078

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #21
    Good! I'd have a few kids if it wasn't for planned parenthood.
     
  22. steve knight, Feb 4, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2012

    thread starter macrumors 68000

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #22
    Koman makes more money then there are places to donate it. They rake it in. PP does a lot of breast exams for the poor for woman who otherwise could not afford it. They stopped funding stem cell research too. A pro life group got the invesigation going and of course it is a hard-core pro-life republican who is doing it. Pro-life'rs want planned parenthood gone no matter who it hurts. They think if they get rid of pp abortions will stop. they have such a short sighted view in that without cheap or free birth control they will increase by quite a bit.
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Location:
    12 across
    #23
    Cancer screenings make up about 15% of Planned Parenthood's services.

    PP performed more than 4 million breast exams and 70,000 mammogram referrals over the last five years.
     
  24. macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #24
    Republicans, and by extension the Religion Right, fail to acknowledge that more kids is not the answer to the World's ills.

    Is is however the answer to their short-term problem, creating a larger base of the pyramid to sustain big corporations/churches.
     
  25. macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #25
    But....but.....ABSTINENCE ONLY EDUCATION!!
     

Share This Page