To the Editor:
Dr. Tom Dean's argument for funding Planned Parenthood is that PP reduces unwanted pregnancies which in turn reduces abortions which he himself characterizes as "a tragedy." I welcome this chance to dialog with a medical professional on the place and function of Planned Parenthood in American society.
If PP's only societal function was to reduce unwanted pregnancies, why does it studiously avoid advocating Natural Family Planning (NFP) among its methods of preventing unwanted pregnancies? Why does PP only advocate chemical and mechanical contraception which, as many scientific studies have shown, are often carcinogenic and dangerous to the health of its users? Is PP, then, an agency for the pharmacy industry? Why does PP engage in providing abortions and then selling body parts? Why does PP so mightily lobby the medical profession (AMA & APA) from classifying as "trauma" the profound physical, emotional and psychological effects an abortion has on a woman? Why does PP so studiously avoid aftercare? Why does PP resist quality improvements to abortion clinics? Why does PP not report unwanted pregnancies of teenagers to police authorities as evidence of possible sexual abuse? Why does PP fight honorable treatment of aborted fetuses by internment? The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was an avowed racist. Why is PP so often found in areas (St. Louis and Colorado) among "low income women?"
PP is not simply a "do-good" organization with only one service - offering contraceptives. It offers abortions as a way to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. It does not deserve tax dollars.
Dr. Dean may be offering to trade one short-term benefit for many long-term evils in our American society. The admittedly "tragic" destruction of a human being simply because he/she is "unwanted" is what PP provides in addition to contraceptives. In fact, abortion is one of their contraceptives. There are many other ways to handle an "unwanted pregnancy." When PP begins advocating adoption and ceases to serve as abortion mills, then, maybe, it deserves public funding.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Rev. Bernard J. Rosinski
Chamberlain
