Thoughts on the Susan G. Komen Foundation decision

Like many of you, I’ve been digesting news about the decision by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, a breast cancer awareness group, to cut funding to Planned Parenthood’s screening program.

Komen says the cut was made because the organization has adopted a new rule that prevents it from funding any group that is part of a government investigation. As we all know, Planned Parenthood has long been criticized by Republican members of Congress because it offers abortion services to women. And, despite the fact that no public money is used for abortion, PP has been on the front lines of a GOP backlash against all things abortion- or contraception-related. U.S. Rep. Cliff Stearns, a staunch anti-abortion Republican from Florida, is spearheading an ongoing investigation into PP’s use of public money (Hyde Amendment be damned).

As a side note, I’d like to be one of those people who say this is only about the regulation of sex, but I can’t honestly do that. The only time I remember Congress getting its collective boxer shorts in a bunch over insurance companies or even the government paying for erectile dysfunction medications was when it was supposedly being given to sex offenders — a topic that will, no doubt, be the focus of political ads in the coming election cycle. I’ve yet to hear one organization that is angry about having to offer insurance options that includes contraception include erectile dysfunction medications in their fury.

The decision by Komen to strip more than $650,000 in funding from PP’s early detection program appears to be politically motivated, and led to at least one official tendering her resignation. Sources have told The Atlantic that the new funding rule adopted by Komen was specifically written to provide an excuse to not continue funding PP.

Mollie Williams, described as Komen’s “top public health official,” was the person who resigned in protest of the decision. Part of a statement from Williams says that she has “dedicated [her] career to fighting for the rights of the marginalized and underserved” and “believe[s] it would be a mistake for any organization to bow to political pressure and compromise its mission.”

Wrapped up in the controversy is Karen Handel, a former Georgia Secretary of State and GOP gubernatorial candidate who has served since April as senior vice president for public policy at Komen. Handel publicly touted anti-abortion credentials and, in the past, specifically noted her non-support of PP including aspects of the organization, such as cancer screenings, that have nothing to do with abortion or contraception services.

The social conservative war against PP — and I do feel very comfortable calling it a war — includes targeting groups that support any part of the health care services that PP provides. And it is important to remember that the vast majority of what PP provides is to under-served female populations — people who would not have access to such services without PP.

For instance, and as many other bloggers have already noted, a shipment of pink Bibles were recalled last year because funds from them would benefit Komen, which was helping PP provide cancer screenings. Closer to home, and as a further example of how some will negatively single out anything PP-related, the vast majority of Iowa Right to Life’s February newsletter is devoted to PP: “Find out what Planned Parenthood is saying to your kids behind your back … and what you should do about it.” As expected, the newsletter offers an assortment of tweets and facebook posts from Planned Parenthood of the Heartland’s accounts. But it also calls out an Iowa high school teacher who tweeted her thanks to PP staffers for visiting her class; and then provides readers some background information on the teacher so that she can be further targeted by those who don’t like PP.

… Did [the] High School approved Planned Parenthood speaking there? Were parents informed? What does an abortion business have to do with Consumer Sciences?

[The teacher] was also recently appointed to be an adviser to the Iowa Association of Family, Career and Community Leaders of America (FCCLA). One of her responsibilities is to mentor other teachers, furthering Planned Parenthood’s agenda, nationally and locally.

… Planned Parenthood is always going to find devious ways of going after your children. …

Upon first hearing the news about Komen stripping funding from the cancer screenings, I was angry. I started thinking about what I could do and came to the conclusion that I couldn’t really do much. I have participated previously in the Komen Race for the Cure events, and I’ve resolved not to do so again. Outside of that, however, I’ve not really invested in Komen since I don’t typically buy any of the pink merchandise. Likewise, I’m one of those folks that give directly to local Planned Parenthood affiliates regularly. (Anytime I see people protesting PP, I stop at that office and hand over $1 for each demonstrator outside. It’s my way of giving back since I received free prenatal vitamins from a Planned Parenthood while I was expecting my oldest daughter.)

As I began to think about this more, however, I’m coming to view it as an attack on anyone or any group that chooses to cooperate with any aspect of PP — or any other group providing comprehensive health care services to women. So, in addition to not participating in future races and writing this post, I’m going to stay on the lookout for those who are not only targeting Planned Parenthood, but targeting those who support any aspect of health care services at Planned Parenthood or other full-service women’s clinics.