Responding to pro-abortion blogger’s claims about Planned Parenthood

The following is a recent blog posted by Amanda Marcotte, in which she not only takes a crack at pro-lifers who favor Virginia’s stricter abortion clinic regulations, but she also attempts to bolster deceptions that are perpetuated by Planned Parenthood in their efforts to downplay their rampant superfluity of abortion services.

Amanda Marcotte

“[W]hat especially gets to me about Virginia’s new regulations that will likely shut down most or all of the 22 abortion providers in the state is that the proponents of the regulations are just so disingenuous.  Every time an anti-choicer bleats about how this is about “protecting” women, I feel like I’ve been locked in a room with someone trying to sell me a time share…No one believes that line: not the people passing the regulations, not the people writing the regulations, not the opponents of the regulations.”

The new abortion facility regulations in Virginia will force abortion clinics to be regulated like any other clinic that performs invasive and potentially hazardous procedures.  Since this threatens the pro-choice ideology that abortion is this perfectly safe surgery, they’re naturally going to cry out against the regulations, even if these regulations are in place to protect women.  Ms. Marcotte is complaining about how “anti-choice extremists” really aren’t in favor of protecting women, when in reality, to be pro-life encompasses being not just pro-unborn child, but pro-woman as well.  Ms. Marcotte doesn’t seem to be able to grasp this concept. (Neither did Charles Blow).

“There’s still some confusion about what the ramifications of these regulations will be.  The regulations basically treat abortion like it’s a dangerous surgical procedure—it’s actually closer to getting a cavity drilled in terms of safety…”

I guess if we disregard the facts that post-abortive women have an increased chance of getting breast cancer, the emotional and mental havoc wreaked on women who obtain abortions, the all other potential immediate and long-term side effects of abortion, and the fact that abortion is 100% lethal for the unborn who are violently destroyed in utero, then yes, abortion is a totally safe procedure for both mothers and babies, just like getting cavities drilled.

“Also, the preferred standard of care with RU-486 is to have a doctor’s office with tools to empty the uterus in a pinch, in case the drugs don’t completely do the job.  It’s not absolutely necessary, but preferred, so I can see how these regulations could sweep up medical abortions with surgical abortions.”

This is pretty twisted.  In reality, the “preferred standard of care with RU-486” is quickly becoming so-called telemedicine, defined as “the ability to provide interactive healthcare utilizing modern technology and telecommunications.”  In other words, chemical abortions are administered via Skype or other webcam methods.  However, if your deliberate miscarriage didn’t starve and expel your baby’s tiny body from your own, fear not: that’s what these handy “in a pinch” surgical abortions are for.

Although few Planned Parenthood abortion facilities actually administer chemical abortions via telemedicine, they are strong proponents of it because it means quicker, easier abortion access.

I have a hard time understanding how pro-choicers can act empathetic, even sympathetic, to women who succumb to aborting, when they just chalk up this traumatic experience as a simple procedure that can be done “in a pinch” like it’s as easy as ordering food at a drive-through.

“… providing abortions is part of the mission of Planned Parenthood, and they do make it a priority. It’s a necessary service, after all … a complete shut-down of abortion services would create a cash flow problem for them.”

Abortion isn’t just a priority for Planned Parenthood.  It is their very top priority, because it is extremely lucrative.  Here is something that Ms. Marcotte and I agree on: of course halting their abortion services would cause a “cash flow problem” for Planned Parenthood!  It makes up over a third of their annual clinic revenue.

“Abortions are 3 percent of the actual services Planned Parenthood provides, but they constitute a larger chunk of their income, around 15 percent nationally.”

If one simply looks at Planned Parenthood’s annual reports, it’s apparent that abortions are actually pretty imperative to the organization.  According to their most current Fact Sheet, their most recent figures are from 2009.  That year, Planned Parenthood performed 332,278 abortions and “saw nearly three million people.”  Just do the math: that means over 11% of Planned Parenthood’s patients received abortions.  Why is that fact not so prominently and proudly reported (like the “only 3%” tout coming up) on their website, their Facebook page, their annual reports, or anywhere else?

I’ll put it this way: Say over the course of ten months, a woman comes to Planned Parenthood to obtain birth control pills nine times (once a month).  In the tenth month, she discovers she is pregnant and has an abortion.  Using Planned Parenthood’s methods for calculating services provided, only 10% of the services provided to that woman were abortion-related.  Deceptive, isn’t it?

According to Planned Parenthood’s website, first-trimester abortions (which constitute about 90% of all abortions performed) cost between $350-$900.  When Live Action did their undercover operations in 2008, the average cost of an abortion at Planned Parenthood was about $468.  Using that number, and considering that Planned Parenthood performed over 332,000 abortions in 2010, we can calculate that Planned Parenthood garners roughly $155500,000 from abortion services alone.  Since Planned Parenthood received over $360,000,000 in government funds in 2010, and we can conclude that abortion constitutes over one-third of their health center annual income.  Including donations and payments for non-abortion services, abortion “services” do make up about 15% of Planned Parenthood’s overall revenue.

“…[A]bortions simply cost more than Pap smears and birth control pills, and Planned Parenthood provides a huge chunk of all the abortions in the country, even for women who get their standard gynecological care elsehwere.”

Another point Ms. Marcotte and I can agree on is that Planned Parenthood does, in fact, provide a huge chunk of abortions in America.  They’ll never boast about that, though. In 2008 (the year with the most recent and complete abortion numbers statistics), there were 1.21 million abortions performed in America.  Planned Parenthood performed 305,310 abortions.  Do the simple math again: this means that more than one out of four abortions is performed by Planned Parenthood.

“…Depriving the women of Virginia of 22 clinics providing this necessary service is a straight-up human rights violation.”

I’d actually argue that depriving the 1.2 million aborted unborn children in our nation of their right to life is a straight-up human rights violation, and revoking the so-called “right” to take their lives is a victory on the side of those human rights.

“…It may not seem obvious to everyone why abortion access is a human right, but if you’re pregnant and you really don’t want to be, the importance of abortion access suddenly becomes quite clear.”

I’ve had friends and family become pregnant when they didn’t want to be.  Some chose abortion, some chose life.  But to shove all women who unintentionally become pregnant into a prejudicial little box and assume one will automatically see that killing an unborn child to solve a problem is degrading and, quite frankly, a pretty misogynistic view.

I’ll also point out that 98% of services that Planned Parenthood provides to pregnant women are abortions (in 2010, they performed 332,278 abortions, administered prenatal care to 7,021 clients, and made 977 adoption referrals).

Is it really that women who accidentally become pregnant suddenly realize the “importance of abortion,” or is it more like Planned Parenthood somehow convinces them of it?

What is Live Action News?

Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective. Learn More

Contact for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.

GUEST ARTICLES: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated. (See here for Open License Agreement.) Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!

To Top