We Asked, You Answered: What reforms could Planned Parenthood make so that you’d be comfortable with them receiving taxpayer funding?
It’s no secret that Planned Parenthood has been the cause of much controversy over the years, especially its reception of tax-payer money to fund their business. Secular Pro-Life decided to explore this issue by asking the following question on social media: “Pro-lifers, are there reforms Planned Parenthood could make such that you’d be comfortable with them receiving taxpayer funding? If so, what?”
Respondents shared a wide variety of answers, with some willing to make concessions, while others distrusted Planned Parenthood entirely. Below is a sampling of those responses, lightly edited for clarity:
Colleen: At this point? No. Not even as a pro-life stance, just an anti-corruption stance. They could completely eliminate any connection to abortion, and I’d still not want them to get [government] funding.
Rachel Elizardbeth Noe: If they became a true women’s healthcare facility and ditched all abortions (not talking about miscarriage care) and gave prenatal care for women in need and even offered free classes on sex education and birth education, I’d be all for them getting government assistance.
Madeline Whiton: Actually do women’s healthcare. Provide pre- and post-natal care, because right now they only give referrals. And completely eliminate abortion services.
Elizabeth Lizzy Graham: As a transgender person, I do like that Planned Parenthood (PP) provides gender-affirming health care, but I don’t like they provide abortions. I have never received any services from PP. I knew a few who have received gender-affirming care from PP. But I would feel less conflicted if PP stopped abortions all together and supported pregnant people with finding reputable adoption avenues and other assistance if they are not in a position raise a baby.
ChristinaBistes: Create a separate corporation for the abortion part of their business. There is a reason why they don’t. Easier to hide where the taxpayer funding is funneled.
Laura W.: They have to stop performing abortions and stop prescribing abortion pills. Focus on things like using funding for mammogram machines. Do more than 3% of the country’s cancer screenings. Talk about how abstinence is 100% while birth control carries risks. Things like this.
@_maddi__rose: If every location had a board-certified OBGYN and had admitting rights to their local hospital—maybe.
Virginia Marie: Actual full-force reproductive care. The most prenatal care they offer is handing out vitamins and doing pregnancy tests. If it was a true medical clinic, I would 1. Be more comfortable and 2. Know that it would still operate even in abortion-ban states, ensuring easier healthcare access
John Lauro: They have to stop being who they are. I’ll probably get some flak for this, but I could support a bi-partisan compromise if they went down to 1st-term-only abortions. That would be a huge step in the right direction. That’s when most of the abortions take place anyways, but they insist they need to push abortions until birth.
Catherine Collingwood Estes: When I worked in Raleigh I did make a couple of referrals to the Planned Parenthood (PP) clinic for prenatal and women’s well-care services. This is primarily because I knew that no abortions were being carried out at the Raleigh location. (They coordinate with a clinic in Chapel Hill.) Further, I had interactions with some of the staff there who, while being perfectly willing to schedule abortions, categorically followed them up with, “and here’s information about birth control because you don’t want to have to go through this again.”
There were also a lot of comments about not needing to have sex to prove yourself, get a guy to like you, boost your self-esteem, etc. It wasn’t abstinence-focused, but they were very clear about abstinence being the only thing that can 100% prevent STDs, pregnancy, etc.
I wasn’t always comfortable with making those referrals but, given those unique circumstances, I could hold my nose when there was nowhere else to send people. Unfortunately, I’m well aware that this situation does NOT describe the majority of PP offices around the country.
PP was originally against abortion; their early literature explicitly says it kills the baby. They also, at one point, referred to abortion as a last resort. If they could go back to that and talk more about birth control and prevention, I’d find them a lot less odious.
Jocelyn Hart Aaron: I mean, no elective abortions.
Katie White: Similar to others’ comments here, plus their finances are insane and need a serious looking at. I’ve never heard anyone support so vehemently any other non-profit that pays its top executive nearly $1,000,000 salary and spends such a huge portion of its income on politics and promotion vs the actual services it purports to provide.
If you appreciate our work and would like to help, one of the most effective ways to do so is to become a monthly donor. You can also give a one time donation here or volunteer with us here.
