Planned Parenthood

It is a disappointment to see the Susan G. Komen Foundation withdraw support for Planned Parenthood under political pressure.

As a POOR (although I didn’t recognize myself as being poor, perpetually broke yes, poor no, I had enough to eat, a place to live and a job) young woman, without health insurance, living 1500 miles away from my family, I discovered an irregularity in my body. It wasn’t anywhere near any bit of me even remotely associated with reproduction but it was something that hadn’t been part of me previously and it scared me.

I was, barely 21, living in New Orleans. I didn’t have a doctor and wouldn’t have known which one to choose. What I did know was Planned Parenthood was full of women who would help me.

I was treated by an Asian medical student, who requested a sickle cell anemia blood sample as part of the clinic protocol completely unrelated to my symptoms. She assured me that my complaint would be temporary, that I was not ill and soon  the body I was more familiar with would be restored to me. I didn’t need any medicine or treatment.

The female, Asian medical student had collected another sample for the sickle cell anemia data base; she was happy. I wasn’t going to expire prematurely; I was happy.

Nobody offered me an abortion.


About elroyjones

Equal Elroy, searching for the best answer.
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Planned Parenthood

  1. gkinnard says:

    Thanks for speaking up! My wife—a person who has used planned parenthood herself—has been in a facebook fight half the night about this! I swear, women can be so damn hard and judgmental towards each other—especially when they’re past childbearing years themselves and are just sure that “they’re” out of danger. This is politically motivated—no question about it!

    • elroyjones says:

      In less affluent areas there is a population of women of a “certain age” who seek treatment and services at Planned Parenthood. I would feel completely comfortable seeking care there myself.

      Reproductive rights impact the entire world. Withholding health care options is instrumental in suppressing half the human population. Reproductive choice and good health care has the potential to empower the entire human population.

    • elroyjones says:

      George, please thank your wife for the traffic from FB!

  2. I am so thankful to read an honest, supportive story about Planned Parenthood. I think it is experiences like this that get lost in the media hype. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with all of us.

  3. The breaking news this morning: Susan G. Komen Foundation reversed their decision not to support Planned Parenthood with the grant in question. It is in part because of people like you. You were willing to stand up and tell of an experience we can all understand. Again, thank you for sharing your story! Thank you for helping to make a difference.

  4. catthax says:

    While Planned Parenthood does good work for Women, their main money maker is abortion. For those of us who believe that Pro-choice means you have the choice to have protected sex or not to have protected sex, it is actually criminal for abortion to be subsidized in any way by the Government. As a woman, you have the ability to “choose” right and wrong. If you “choose” to have unprotected sex, it is your responsibility to pay the consequences, either carrying your child to eventual adoption or raising that child yourself. A child is not a “mistake”, they are human life. A person’s actions may be a “mistake”. Then, that person must take responsibility for that mistake, not just get rid of it to avoid tough situations resulting from that mistake.

    • elroyjones says:

      Where did you find the financials for Planned Parenthood indicating that abortion is a significant source of revenue? I’m interested in reading those financials. It is my understanding that government is not subsidizing abortion.

      Health care practitioners have the “choice” to work with entities that are aligned with their philosophies. Those opposed to abortion also have the “choice” to patronize medical practices refusing services that are offensive to them.

      Unwanted pregnancy is not exclusively a female concern. Perhaps it is time for free vasectomies for men who prefer not to father children.

  5. catthax says:

    This is just one article of many that question the “financials” of Planned Parenthood. For years there have been questions about shifting money from government grants to Planned Parenthood to abortion services. It is big business. As for “free” vasectomies for men – nothing is “free”. Somebody has to pay for it. I’ve looked at PP’s financial statements and they do not itemize their health costs so it is impossible for the public to know where the money comes from and goes.

    • elroyjones says:

      Where did you find the financials?

      You are absolutely correct nothing is free. I am 100% supportive of spending my tax dollars on vasectomies to aid in the prevention of unwanted pregnancy and to make the responsibility for pregnancy a bit more equitable.

      How many of those opposed to abortion would be willing to adopt an unwanted, drug addicted, infant?

      There is a need for Planned Parenthood, particularly for the marginalized, poverty stricken, women in this country and the world.

      It’s unfortunate that this issue is taking time and energy that could be better spent elsewhere, on the economy for instance.

      I wholeheartedly support a woman’s right to choose under the protections afforded by Roe V. Wade in 1973.

  6. catthax says:

    I found PP’s financials under their website. Unfortunately, it takes investigation on the itemization of services through legal means because they don’t break it down.

    While I don’t mind paying taxes for vasectomies or tubals, a large number of people do mind. I don’t support Roe V. Wade and believe it should be a vote of the people in each state who decide on abortions. The same with vasectomies and tubals. The Court case was a sham based on the Penundrum of the Constitution. They made up that word and it was about the right to privacy.

    On the question of who would adopt an unwanted, drug addicted Infant, I have personal experience. A neighbor adopted twin girls – black girls – who were addicted to crack when they were born. Those girls are 5 now and have had many problems, but their parents love them to death. I have a girlfriend who adopted an alcohol syndrome baby who is doing just fine. My own daughter, after having two miscarriages, was more than willing to adopt a drug addicted infant but got pregnant shortly after going through the first stages of adoption. I now have a healthy, 9 month old grandbaby but would have loved an adopted child just as much.

    Like I said in my first post, I think PP does some good work. I think they are narrow minded when it comes to adstinence education in addition to contraceptive training and I know they try very little to adopt infants out as opposed to aborting them. I can send you that info if you want it.

    The Komen foundation also does good work. It’s whole objective, however, is breast cancer, not contraception, abortion, etc. They should be allowed to defund a group that doesn’t do mammograms if they so choose without being demonized.

    The reason the two of us are spending time and energy on this issue is simply because YOU raised it in your blog. Why ARE you spending so much time on it?

    • elroyjones says:

      Planned Parenthood does fund mammograms.

      I wasn’t referring to individual time spent on the issue, I was referring to media time and political time.

      You are fortunate to know people willing to live their beliefs. As I am happy to have the freedom to live mine.

      Later- At first I wasn’t going to respond to the distinction you made when illustrating your neighbor’s adoption of twin drug addicted babies but it stuck with me bothering me all day long.
      Extending the benefit of doubt to you, I must first ask, are you suggesting that little black babies are more sought after thus your neighbor was lucky to get them? Or are you a bigot convinced of white supremacy?

  7. Peggy says:

    I just have to weigh in here. Given what women had to go through before PP, I can’t imagine anyone, most especially a woman, who would in any way think it was a good thing to go back to that. Before PP, rich women could have legal abortions but poor women had to have babies that they didn’t always want. They were poor and had many mouths to feed. This is a great article from the New Yorker that should be required reading for everyone:

  8. catthax says:

    First, to Elroyjones. Of course, I am a bigot. The parents of the twins are white. There are plenty of crack addicted babies from all ethnicities. Raising children is challenging and rewarding, but when you adopt, there are added challenges. When you adopt children who are addicted, it adds another layer of challenges. When you add babies who are a different ethnicity than you, it adds yet another challenge. These people are noble and courageous to save these little girls and give them a good home, no matter their challenges. Yes, the parents were lucky to have these girls but, more than that, the girls are lucky to have such loving and giving parents. There are families out there that would give anything to have biological babies and, if they can’t, are happy to give unwanted children a loving home. There are many people who feel compelled to adopt disabled children to give them a loving chance at a worthwhile life. If you have ever known a Down’s Syndrome child, you will know they are most often the most loving, gifted children who give the people around them much more than they get.

    Peggy – from reading my previous post, you must know that I am Pro-Life. That doesn’t mean I’m against contraception. I’m just against using abortion as a form of contraception. I believe when the sperm and egg cells start dividing, that is the beginning of life. Since I believe it is the beginning of human life, carrying that out to it’s conclusion, to me it is taking a human life when an abortion is done. Unless the mother’s life is in danger, I believe every effort should be made to AVOID the taking of that life. It makes no difference if the child is addicted, disabled, white, black, asian..whatever. There is most likely a family out there that will give that child a home. At least the chances are pretty good. If so many people are in favor of abortion, why not let the people vote on the issue by State and let them decide if they want it? I’m sure Planned Parenthood would get more than enough money through donations to do what they do. The “Crisis Pregnancy Centers”, which PP’s website says to be wary of because they don’t offer information on abortions, are not given tax dollars for their services. Why be so afraid of a group who gives other alternatives? There are so many issues in the New Yorker piece that are spin and misleading I would need three days to go through them. A rather all to the left article, to be sure.

    • elroyjones says:

      The world is full of mixed families. Even in the small hamlet where I live, there are traditional families w/hispanic adoptees, gay/lesbian families w/black adoptees and grandparents raising drug addicted infant grandchildren. The distinction is unnecessary. As you have skillfully illustrated, there are plenty of babies in the world waiting to be adopted. There is no reason to force women to birth more of them. Thankfully, SGK has reinstated funding for Planned Parenthood.

  9. catthax says:

    I give up. Just abort the babies. It’s the right thing to do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s